QF Group possible Redundancy Numbers/Packages

[maggot]

love him, hate him, I don’t care. However I’m glad he’s the one in the big seat. It means the company will survive.

At the end of the day Qantas ain’t a government entity anymore. Many still behave as if it is.
this in spades

[ozbiggles]

I have professional respect for Joyce (I am a shareholder after all!). We have seen he will take the hard decisions for the company and that is the point. Like all business, Qantas is just that. You could be the pope himself working for any company but if the CEO needs to cut you he/she will. I question however whether anyone is worth 24 million a year who then goes onto say we need to make cuts to be viable.
Anyway we must all face forward and continue making progress...just remember the brace position.

[Lapon]

love him, hate him, I don’t care. However I’m glad he’s the one in the big seat. It means the company will survive.

At the end of the day Qantas ain’t a government entity anymore. Many still behave as if it is.

But is it competance or luck that has resulted in Qantas faring better than others? Have there been any radical decisions taken that few other CEOs might have?

Im not trying to sound negative, but its a question fanboys should ask.

I think that fleets of 4 engine aircraft and tired 330s in this day and age is terrible, however it doesnt look so bad when a black swan event grounds any fleet you have anyway.

[markis10]

They spent $500m on refurbs for 6 of them. At least 6 will come back. My guess is the remaining money from the share raising will be used to buy 350s.

Only three are done, two are a WIP, and QF have sent refits to retirement not long after they were done in the past

[blubak]

I have professional respect for Joyce (I am a shareholder after all!). We have seen he will take the hard decisions for the company and that is the point. Like all business, Qantas is just that. You could be the pope himself working for any company but if the CEO needs to cut you he/she will. I question however whether anyone is worth 24 million a year who then goes onto say we need to make cuts to be viable.
Anyway we must all face forward and continue making progress...just remember the brace position.
How much has he devalued the company by today with a 9% drop in the share price.
I would rather have my money in the bank earning 1% as opposed to letting someone gamble with it & having no obligation to repay it when suddenly its not there any more.

[V-Jet]

Joyce is an incompetent business owner.

He has built a management ‘team’ on total lack of vision and complete focus on remuneration.

No vision, no instinct, no feel and no understanding of, nor for, the business.

He has risen to the top of a middling field by being a total yes man (I’m deliberately leaving the bending over jokes aside) and _always_ pleasing the boss.

That’s the beginning and end of it. In short, the antithesis of ANYONE I would employ and if I hadn’t seen such incompetence first hand I’d never have believed it.

The board and the bankers that back the tool have exactly the same non experience in anything business related so they think he’s great.

None of them would be able to competently manage so much as a cafe. If they had, Qantas would be the type of airline it was 30+ years ago where everyone gave their all as a matter of course.

[Blueskymine]

But is it competance or luck that has resulted in Qantas faring better than others? Have there been any radical decisions taken that few other CEOs might have?

Im not trying to sound negative, but its a question fanboys should ask.

I think that fleets of 4 engine aircraft and tired 330s in this day and age is terrible, however it doesnt look so bad when a black swan event grounds any fleet you have anyway.

I suppose an analogy is this.

Qantas is like a conservative 60+ year old couple living in the outer burbs who own everything, have various investments and pay for things in cash.

Other airlines are like a gen y share trader who own nothing, lease everything and has done pretty well
in the good times.

It’s good to own things when the times are bad. Qantas mostly owns it’s ageing fleet.

[V-Jet]

Yep - incompetent, over the hill and not in it for anything but the cash.

Contain my excitement and tell me how I sign up to work for a failing and unenthused dinosaur.....

[Lapon]

I suppose an analogy is this.

Qantas is like a conservative 60+ year old couple living in the outer burbs who own everything, have various investments and pay for things in cash.

Other airlines are like a gen y share trader who own nothing, lease everything and has done pretty well
in the good times.

It’s good to own things when the times are bad. Qantas mostly owns it’s ageing fleet.

Imagine owning a modernised fleet and what could have been achieved over the last 10 years.

Also Qantas is not a conservative 60 year old couple, what they lack in lease commitments they make up for in debt.

Right now the answer seems by sheer luck to be correct, but with the wrong working.

In my opinion AJ has not done anything that any other CEO would have done in handling the crises. It's the past performance I'm dubious about.

[dr dre]

With multiple billion dollar profits leading up to this year, decent reserves of cash to stay afloat for 18 months and good financial discipline have put the company in one of the best positions for an airline worldwide in dealing with this. The way some posters here are talking they would rather the airline be loaded up to the eyeballs in debt paying off orders of dozens of 777s.

Being in this position didn’t come about by luck, it was due to smart financial management.

[Lapon]

With multiple billion dollar profits leading up to this year, decent reserves of cash to stay afloat for 18 months and good financial discipline have put the company in one of the best positions for an airline worldwide in dealing with this. The way some posters here are talking they would rather the airline be loaded up to the eyeballs in debt paying off orders of dozens of 777s.

Being in this position didn’t come about by luck, it was due to smart financial management.

Smart finacial management, or inaction that resulted in a favorable position this time around?

We can all imagine our own 'what if's', but I dont have any major criticism of the handling of the current crises to date.
Whether the handling has been the stuff of genius, or simply a CEO doing his/her job is what tempers my praise.

[Ken Borough]

Angry, hindsight is a wonderful attribute. :ugh:

[ozbiggles]

I’m not sure how you expect him not to destroy some equity in the middle of a pandemic? Same reason unfortunately airlines are letting 20-50-100% of their staff go. I mean never waste a crisis but things can’t stay the same and survive in this environment.

[ozbiggles]

You could have had Borghetti!

[CaptCloudbuster]

With QF now a very different airline going forward do we need 3 CEO’s?

Surely we should make at least 1 redundant. Andrew David has been MIA (couldn’t phone in to at least 1 webinar over the last 8 weeks wtf?)
And then we have Tino, CEO of a non existent International.

[hoss58]

You could have had Borghetti!
They nearly did.

[Lapon]

In defense or JB he did have a vision.

Sure, ego and execution got in the way, but the basic vision was there. It looks like that might potentially be realised now for VA going fowards (one hopes).

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Seems to me that the problem with Borghetti was that he tried to run Virgin like it was Qantas. Perhaps if he’d got to run Qantas like it was Qantas, the result would’ve been very different. We’ll never know.

[dragon man]

Monday night Four corners I believe is on the demise of Virgin and I’m told Borghetti doesn’t come out of it very well

[V-Jet]

Totally with you Lapon. He ‘died’ doing what he set out to do. Better to have tried etc etc...

[bazza stub]

So the latest on JQ “surplus” Perth and Newcastle crews seem to be (in a nut shell), give us 2 years of a concessional EBA and we might not make those crews redundant. Can’t say I’m surprised but seriously can this guy give an already very stressed workforce a break.

[blubak]

With QF now a very different airline going forward do we need 3 CEO’s?

Surely we should make at least 1 redundant. Andrew David has been MIA (couldn’t phone in to at least 1 webinar over the last 8 weeks wtf?)
And then we have Tino, CEO of a non existent International.
Why have they ever needed 3 X ceo?
Maybe the title entitles them to more pay without being scrutinised by shareholders etc.
On the point of having large cash reserves,seems contradictory to go & mortgage every aircraft you can & then do an equity raising,paying interest on borrowed money & pushing the share price lower is an interesting way to save money.

[unobtanium]

Why have they ever needed 3 X ceo?
Maybe the title entitles them to more pay without being scrutinised by shareholders etc.
On the point of having large cash reserves,seems contradictory to go & mortgage every aircraft you can & then do an equity raising,paying interest on borrowed money & pushing the share price lower is an interesting way to save money.

Try 5

Andrew David - Domestic and Freight
Tino - International
Olivia - Loyalty
Gareth Evans - Jetstar
And Alan Joyce, CEO of CEO's.

https://www.qantas.com/au/en/qantas-group/acting-responsibly/our-leadership.html

[blubak]

Try 5

Andrew David - Domestic and Freight
Tino - International
Olivia - Loyalty
Gareth Evans - Jetstar
And Alan Joyce, CEO of CEO's.

https://www.qantas.com/au/en/qantas-group/acting-responsibly/our-leadership.html
The more the merrier!
We been everywhere men.

[armchairpilot94116]

https://taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2020/06/26/2003738867

Hard times still ahead.

[Turnleft080]

I do expect some equity to be destroyed during a pandemic, the outflow of $40m a week is testament to that. There’s nothing you, I or AJ can do about that.

Struth 40m a week, as a comparison during Ansett's last years they were losing 7m a week. The value of money in 20 years. I realise different era.

[PPRuNeUser0184]

https://taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2020/06/26/2003738867

Hard times still ahead.

Thanks for the update from the Taipei Times. Very insightful.

[ANstar]

I do expect some equity to be destroyed during a pandemic, the outflow of $40m a week is testament to that. There’s nothing you, I or AJ can do about that.

Struth 40m a week, as a comparison during Ansett's last years they were losing 7m a week. The value of money in 20 years. I realise different era.

There is a difference to outgoings of $40m a week to losses of $7m a week.

Salary costs alone were abut $86m a week(4,5bn a year) before covid - thats before you take into account the other costs like office rent, aircraft, overheads etc.

[Bankstown]

Try 5

Andrew David - Domestic and Freight
Tino - International
Olivia - Loyalty
Gareth Evans - Jetstar
And Alan Joyce, CEO of CEO's.

https://www.qantas.com/au/en/qantas-group/acting-responsibly/our-leadership.html
There’s also a CEO of Associated Airlines and Services?

[Ragnor]

What is the real number of redundancies here? I think 250 is well short. JQ have already threaten of mass lay offs Given a quoted email from the union which will happen even if the new EBA is signed end of July. QF surely will have to make more cuts to its international and domestic 737 crew.
Now that VA have very deep pockets with Bain I would think they will come out smaller but stronger than QF

[maggot]

What is the real number of redundancies here? I think 250 is well short. JQ have already threaten of mass lay offs Given a quoted email from the union which will happen even if the new EBA is signed end of July. QF surely will have to make more cuts to its international and domestic 737 crew.
Now that VA have very deep pockets with Bain I would think they will come out smaller but stronger than QF
why?
shorthaul? How so? Rotating stand down with low mgh.... why cuts?
long haul? Indefinite stand down costs little.
redundency costs alot.

[blubak]

What is the real number of redundancies here? I think 250 is well short. JQ have already threaten of mass lay offs Given a quoted email from the union which will happen even if the new EBA is signed end of July. QF surely will have to make more cuts to its international and domestic 737 crew.
Now that VA have very deep pockets with Bain I would think they will come out smaller but stronger than QF
Have to agree with that!
When i first saw the figure of 220-250 pilots it seemed very low,with 12 380s & 6 747s gone the figure for those 2 fleets alone would exceed the numbers they are quoting & then theres 330s,787s & the jq 787s,just doesnt add up.

[cloudsurfng]

QF SH pilots are forecast to all be stood up by the end of this year. There will be no changes to SH. In fact, there has been some discussion about allowing additional LH crew to be trained onto 737 temporarily to save some jobs. Obviously that’s a fair way off and any change would need to be voted on by the SH crew. This would be a mechanism to save junior crew, not to allow old mate 4 eng capt to extend his career for a few more years.

[normanton]

Someone in the webinar made the comment of a LWOP would count towards the 190 total. Well not really. If 190 pilots from the 380 take LWOP then 2-3 years down the track we have the exact same problem again (minus retirements).

[Ragnor]

why?
shorthaul? How so? Rotating stand down with low mgh.... why cuts?
long haul? Indefinite stand down costs little.
redundency costs alot.

Given forecast there is no need for 2019 crew levels for 2021 operation people are forgetting the worse has not hit the economy yet, unemployment is close to 8% now this will be worse after job keeper ends, also there is no prospect of borders opening up anytime soon especially WA, Tuesday we will find out about QLD but wouldn't hold my breath then those 15,000 numbers AJ said gets re worked. When we go into 2021 this will be scary. NT I commend their approach making everyone sign a declaration rest of the country should be adopting this maybe this would get things moving quicker.
Stand down with roster on roster off does cost more than people allow. You have AL, LSL accrual then you have EPs, sims then paxing for sims then a hotel room human factors, DGs, cost of an ASIC cost of parking the list goes on more than you think. So the 250 is most likely just what Jetstar will do, how many LH and SH pilots will QF fund with a down turn of pax numbers. Just saying 250 is very far from the truth.

[maggot]

Someone in the webinar made the comment of a LWOP would count towards the 190 total. Well not really. If 190 pilots from the 380 take LWOP then 2-3 years down the track we have the exact same problem again (minus retirements).

costs the company nothing (saves actually), kicks the can down the road til maybe theyre needed. Good (band aid) solution but not sure how many lwop's there'll be

[34R]

how many LH and SH pilots will QF fund with a down turn of pax numbers. Just saying 250 is very far from the truth.

You tell us. What figure would you be satisfied with?

You have been provided a figure with reasons behind it. If you call bulls!t then I suspect no figure that is given will be adequate.
There wouldn't be a QF/J*/VA pilot in the bottom third or quarter of their respective lists that isn't looking over their shoulder right now.

[Wingspar]

I doubt they’ll offer them 737 slots.
At the moment those LHaulers approaching 65 can’t rely on a 737 slot to keep going.
If there isn’t one there they can’t take it.
I bet the company will want that demographic to take the VR package.
Especially seeing that most of them are on the 74 and 380.
The bigger issue is how long can they keep them stood down.
I doubt a reasonable person would expect that to be three years?

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

What is the real number of redundancies here? I think 250 is well short. JQ have already threaten of mass lay offs Given a quoted email from the union which will happen even if the new EBA is signed end of July. QF surely will have to make more cuts to its international and domestic 737 crew.
Now that VA have very deep pockets with Bain I would think they will come out smaller but stronger than QF

I didn’t see any such email, unless you’re referring to the NZ operation communication regarding stand down provisions being included into their agreement.

So far the JQ pilot redundancies are around half a dozen F/Os from NZ and none from Australia. PER and NTL closing but those aircraft being redeployed to MEL & BNE.

Yes, Virgin will now have deep pockets, but they will likely be a more rational competitor with Bain steering them to a mid market carrier. In the Aus domestic market we already have Tiger gone, VA reducing to 40-50 737s, VA A330s gone.

My reading of the situation is that most of the shrinking of the domestic market will be absorbed by a downsized Virgin, and QF group should return to a similiar capacity of 2019 by mid 2021. But that’s only my opinion, I could be wrong.

[ANCDU]

I didn’t see any such email, unless you’re referring to the NZ operation communication regarding stand down provisions being included into their agreement.

So far the JQ pilot redundancies are around half a dozen F/Os from NZ and none from Australia. PER and NTL closing but those aircraft being redeployed to MEL & BNE.

Yes, Virgin will now have deep pockets, but they will likely be a more rational competitor with Bain steering them to a mid market carrier. In the Aus domestic market we already have Tiger gone, VA reducing to 40-50 737s, VA A330s gone.

My reading of the situation is that most of the shrinking of the domestic market will be absorbed by a downsized Virgin, and QF group should return to a similiar capacity of 2019 by mid 2021. But that’s only my opinion, I could be wrong.

ECAM I think Jetstar is in line for a big hit too, a lot of aircraft used to do Bali, Tasman and the pacific, and not from NZ. Just by numbers if you say just a fifth of the narrow body fleet was flying internationally that’s a lot of crew that have no work. It’s no use transferring airframes from PER to MEL if their flying doesn’t exist anymore. This is a time when all unions needs to work with management to try and save the careers of those near the bottom of the airlines respective lists. There’s just not enough flying domestically in Australia for the number of pilots, in any of the major airlines.

Respective unions have a massive job ahead of them to try and keep redundancies down.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

ECAM I think Jetstar is in line for a big hit too, a lot of aircraft used to do Bali, Tasman and the pacific, and not from NZ. Just by numbers if you say just a fifth of the narrow body fleet was flying internationally that’s a lot of crew that have no work. It’s no use transferring airframes from PER to MEL if their flying doesn’t exist anymore. This is a time when all unions needs to work with management to try and save the careers of those near the bottom of the airlines respective lists. There’s just not enough flying domestically in Australia for the number of pilots, in any of the major airlines.

Respective unions have a massive job ahead of them to try and keep redundancies down.

The majority of Tasman flying and all Pacific flying is done by NZ crew.

That leaves about 5 extra NB frames that did the Bali flying, however we were 2 frames short prior to COVID due to the aircraft sent to Network with no decrease in the JQ domestic schedule and about 50 pilots short, about to embark on a big round of recruitment with many guys flying close to 100 hrs a month.

The official word from GE was no pilot redundancies from the Aus operation.

The company hasn’t been shy about letting JQ Asia and JQNZ know about redundancies so if there were plans in the works to let Aussie guys go they would’ve let us know. But of course plans can change.

Also worth noting is that while the broader QF group is having 20% of their workforce slashed, the figure for JQ is 6% (mainly head office).

It seems the biggest threat is closing more smaller bases and transferring the flying to the big 3.

[Overspeed1]

Who’s going to take LWOP? There’s no jobs to go to this time (except maybe the guys that can get back into the airforce).

Obviously the company loves the idea because it gets people off the books for a few years without having a cough up the cash for redundancy. Having your cake and eating it too.

[Keg]

Any 747 or A380 pilot over the age of 63 should be wishing for a VR offer. Even if the company offered just the leave they would accrue over the next 12-24 months whilst stood down and to cash out their current leave balance, with the tax rates applied for redundancy the crew member would be well in front of what they’d get otherwise just sticking it out on stand down.

Anything above that number that AIPA can negotiate is a win for those crew.

Of course it depends on whether one thinks those crew can be kept stood down beyond March next year, whether the international borders are open and so on. So still a bit of a mess to work through.

One thing for sure. There are no winners in all of this. Everyone loses. Some will just lose less than others.

[ozbiggles]

I don’t know Keg, if you had a hand sanitizer or toilet paper business you would be doing ok, although it is a flooded market....

[BNEA320]

Qantas plans to resume Trans-Tasman services from July 20, 2020 with the following:
Brisbane – Auckland 14 weekly
Brisbane – Christchurch 7 weekly
Brisbane – Queenstown 3 weekly
Melbourne – Auckland 27 weekly
Melbourne – Christchurch 5 weekly
Melbourne – Queenstown 3 weekly
Melbourne – Wellington 7 weekly
Sydney – Auckland 34 weekly
Sydney – Christchurch 7 weekly
Sydney – Queenstown 14 weekly
Sydney – Wellington 14 weekly

from routesonline

[34R]

Any 747 or A380 pilot over the age of 63 should be wishing for a VR offer.

Any LONG HAUL pilot over the age of 63 would be wishing for it. Occasional stand up's over the next few years at best compared to a clean break and a yet to be determined package??

[dr dre]

Who’s going to take LWOP? There’s no jobs to go to this time.

Sometimes an event like this can be a spur to people to branch out into things they’ve always wanted to do but never had the time or impetus to commit to. Other industries, other professions, a small business, charity, study, stay at home parent etc. I sense a feeling amongst pilots these days that a lot would maybe desire to spend a small period out of their working career doing something unrelated to flying.

Obviously there won’t be as many taking up the offer as those who took up other airline pilot positions in previous eras of LWOP. But I think a few will.

[C441]

Why offer VR to those over (say 62) on the 744 and 380 when they can probably leave them stood-down indefinitely at almost no cost? VR will almost certainly be used to offset training costs, so anyone that won't have to be trained through extended stand-downs won't get a look at VR.

Those under 60 would be able to see out the time until the 380 is returned to service or scrapped and still be valuable/productive in 2 to 3 years. Offer the 58-62 year olds (or whatever makes up 190) a VR and the training cost vs return value is significantly reduced.

[dragon man]

There is a belief that the 747 pilots now have to be dealt with as they can’t be stood down as they don’t have any work as their aircraft is retired, therefore they need to either VR them or RIN them to another aircraft and then stand them down again.

[Wingspar]

Isn’t there also the Super consideration for those in Division one?
A calculation of the average last three years of income?

[dr dre]

Isn’t there also the Super consideration for those in Division one?
A calculation of the average last three years of income?

Highest earning 3 of the last 10 years. But very doubtful there’ll be many more prosperous than the last 3 in the near future for most

[Wingspar]

:ok:
Thanks!

[ScepticalOptomist]

Why offer VR to those over (say 62) on the 744 and 380 when they can probably leave them stood-down indefinitely at almost no cost?

Because stand down can’t be indefinite. At some point it becomes a commercial decision and the clause of stand down won’t apply. Ie When the government no longer has a travel ban / border closure in place.

Then the company have a choice - pay you MGH to sit around and do nothing - or follow the provisions in the EBA regarding reduction in numbers. That becomes their choice - it will be interesting to see how they “get the numbers right”.

[Keg]

Why offer VR to those over (say 62) on the 744 and 380 when they can probably leave them stood-down indefinitely at almost no cost?

Why keep them when for the same cost to the business of keeping them stood down when you can show the market that you’re ‘doing something’ about the crewing numbers? Win/win for both parties. Doesn’t cost Qantas anything additional beyond what they were going to pay anyway, pilot clears more than they would had they remained stood down burning their 7 weeks and 2 days accrued leave each year. Plus the crew member gets better tax treatment of their accrued leave up their sleeve now.

I actually think it’d be immoral if Qantas didn’t immediately (or very soon) offer VR to anyone who turns 65 prior to April next year so that they can use the better redundancy tax rates for their accrued leave.

Personally I’d hope the offer would be a bit better than just the 7.3 weeks per annum until 65. Certainly you’ll need to offer a bit more to (say) a 60 or 61 year old if you wanted them to bail out earlier given they’re likely to do some flying in a few years. I guess it depends on demand and so on.

[C441]

Because stand down can’t be indefinite.
As one of those staring at conceivably 3 years of stand-down I hope you're right, but one thing I am sure of is that Qantas demonstrated during the EA negotiations that they are far from a benevolent society. They will endeavour to keep us stood down as long as they can - by fair means or foul.

[normanton]

Of course they will. They will argue there is no work for the 380 and thus you can remain stood down. Just because the borders are open, in the eyes of Qantas, changes nothing. If there is no useful work for the 380, and they intend to keep the fleet, then you can remain stood down.

Not saying I agree with it, but it will require the union taking the matter to FWA. You would assume Qantas has already done the homework on this.

[Blueskymine]

I’m not sure if I’d be up to it at 61 to have a couple of years off and get back into it at a reasonable standard. It’s hard enough now after a few months.

If I were over 60 I’d be using this as a rehearsal for the big retirement.

It’s also probably adding years to your life, or if not years, those years in retirement will be in better health.


Why keep them when for the same cost to the business of keeping them stood down when you can show the market that you’re ‘doing something’ about the crewing numbers? Win/win for both parties. Doesn’t cost Qantas anything additional beyond what they were going to pay anyway, pilot clears more than they would had they remained stood down burning their 7 weeks and 2 days accrued leave each year. Plus the crew member gets better tax treatment of their accrued leave up their sleeve now.

I actually think it’d be immoral if Qantas didn’t immediately (or very soon) offer VR to anyone who turns 65 prior to April next year so that they can use the better redundancy tax rates for their accrued leave.

Personally I’d hope the offer would be a bit better than just the 7.3 weeks per annum until 65. Certainly you’ll need to offer a bit more to (say) a 60 or 61 year old if you wanted them to bail out earlier given they’re likely to do some flying in a few years. I guess it depends on demand and so on.

[Wingspar]

It’s all bluff!
Qantas will try it but I can’t see hundreds of crew blindly accepting that they can be stood down indefinitely!
To me the EA and FWA are quite clear. They can’t be stood down indefinitely if there are no limitations to international travel.
Qantas are trying it now because the other option is too expensive.
Ive seen it before and I’m even seeing it now in one example. QF will try to pull the wool over your eyes.
If that won’t work they’ll try cut a deal with AIPA.
What someone should do is lodge a grievance and then go to FW.
That is the only way to get something done.

[ozbiggles]

Fair work will judge based on what is best for the greater good, that means the best way of keeping some jobs (not all) and the company functioning in a world of Covid and health restrictions FW a will not save you as an individual if you are just dragging the Tribe down with you. It is the new world order. Adapt and overcome. (Gunnery Sergeant Highway).

[ScepticalOptomist]

Of course they will. They will argue there is no work for the 380 and thus you can remain stood down. Just because the borders are open, in the eyes of Qantas, changes nothing. If there is no useful work for the 380, and they intend to keep the fleet, then you can remain stood down.

Not saying I agree with it, but it will require the union taking the matter to FWA. You would assume Qantas has already done the homework on this.

It’s not based on whether you agree, or whether they intend to keep the fleet. The EBA is quite clear on when stand down can occur. FWA are pretty clear that in the case of an EBA covering a situation, they won’t interfere with it.

Union won’t need to do much, if anything. The EBA that was recently voted upon during this pandemic, stands.

Normanton, what QF would like to do, and what they can do, are very different things.

Won’t stop them trying to cut a deal to pull the wool over your eyes where they can though!

LH and SH EBAs are pretty tight - and not in QFs favour. Can’t speak for the other EBAs in the group.

[aviones]

It’s not based on whether you agree, or whether they intend to keep the fleet. The EBA is quite clear on when stand down can occur. FWA are pretty clear that in the case of an EBA covering a situation, they won’t interfere with it.

Union won’t need to do much, if anything. The EBA that was recently voted upon during this pandemic, stands.

Normanton, what QF would like to do, and what they can do, are very different things.

Won’t stop them trying to cut a deal to pull the wool over your eyes where they can though!

LH and SH EBAs are pretty tight - and not in QFs favour. Can’t speak for the other EBAs in the group.

Qantas initially announced they were grounding the A380 for 6 months based on the collapse of forward bookings. That was before the international borders were closed. The borders closed very soon after this announcement which left Qantas with no choice but to ground the fleet. Once the borders open, if there is still not sufficient forward bookings, Qantas will leave crew stood down as they were going to originally, due to lack of demand - not the closure of the borders. Unfortunately the EA does not address how long crew can remain stood down so arbitration will eventually be needed to determine when the stand down no longer applies.

[Ruvap]

As one of those staring at conceivably 3 years of stand-down I hope you're right, but one thing I am sure of is that Qantas demonstrated during the EA negotiations that they are far from a benevolent society. They will endeavour to keep us stood down as long as they can - by fair means or foul.


Thats because some of those ego driven sky gods amongst your A380 lot are total wank#rs and deserve what’s coming. Sadly, they might take the good guys down with them. Surely the government won’t keep giving these half a million dollar guys jobkeeper when there are so many others out there who are really finding it tough going and need the help. The gravy train is done and dusted!

[Iron Bar]

+1 for Ruvap on job keeper, means test on the way?

Anyone who thinks there will be some magic trigger or commercial epiphany forcing Qantas away from stand down provisions, is dreamin’. Covid effects will last for a long time and as was mentioned earlier by Ozbiggles, the greater good will trump the interests of the senior pilot cadre.

Fat guy in coat, 100% correct. I doubt that will go to far. Industrially difficult and potentially a very negative outcome.

[34R]

Thats because some of those ego driven sky gods amongst your A380 lot are total wank#rs and deserve what’s coming.

What an imbecilic comment.
Every fleet in every airline has wankers among them, but nobody deserves “what’s coming”....

I've been through it before and I wouldn’t wish it on anybody.

[V-Jet]

Disgraceful attitude guys. Those 'wank#rs' on the 380 gave you the conditions you now enjoy. I can scarcely believe such tripe comes from supposedly educated people.

[Going Boeing]

Very poor comments from Ruvap & Iron Bar. It’s times like this that we should be supporting each other, not insulting & denigrating your peers.

[dr dre]

I do find it amusing how, after spending the last 30 years denigrating SH pilots, and telling all and sundry how crap the 737 is, there are now demands (both privately and even publicly, I’m told) from A380 crew to be given the right to displace a 737 position.

Well that’s not going to happen.

For one, it’s not legal (can’t displace someone working under another agreement), this was established and settled during the 2014 RIN.

Secondly it’d be a massive expense to retrain all of your domestic pilots, and management have made it quite clear they want absolutely zero unnecessary expense.

It will never happen.

[Angle of Attack]

Shorthaul has been denigrated for years, nothing new about that, so I don’t think there is any gain abusing others in this current plight, ironically now the 737 is the senior fleet at least for the next couple of years, am told there will be very little training from LH to Shorthaul as it costs far too much in the short to medium term anyway. There may be some training longish term as Domestic gets back to normal levels and attrition slowly reduces the SH crew numbers. Displacements between different awards? Lol that’s the funniest thing I’ve read for ages, it goes against everything the whole RIN process is legally blinded by, try and ask FWA about that fairytale request..

[Ruvap]

I do find it amusing how, after spending the last 30 years denigrating SH pilots, and telling all and sundry how crap the 737 is, there are now demands (both privately and even publicly, I’m told) from A380 crew to be given the right to displace a 737 position.

hear hear.....The CEO is absolutely doing the right thing. Those senior A380/747 pilots only put a uniform on maybe 15 days every 56 day BP and for that they make a killing and still they complain. What they make in allowances alone would pay the mortgage for some of the battlers in society. There is no way they deserve any jobkeeper amount so that must be stopped ASAP!

[ruprecht]

hear hear.....The CEO is absolutely doing the right thing. Those senior A380/747 pilots only put a uniform on maybe 15 days every 56 day BP and for that they make a killing and still they complain. What they make in allowances alone would pay the mortgage for some of the battlers in society. There is no way they deserve any jobkeeper amount so that must be stopped ASAP!
If you’re going to troll, you could be a little less obvious... :hmm:

[dragon man]

hear hear.....The CEO is absolutely doing the right thing. Those senior A380/747 pilots only put a uniform on maybe 15 days every 56 day BP and for that they make a killing and still they complain. What they make in allowances alone would pay the mortgage for some of the battlers in society. There is no way they deserve any jobkeeper amount so that must be stopped ASAP!


What a goose you are, 15 days in 56 if only.

[Chad Gates]

It doesn’t help when you have a senior LH captain call into a webinar and demand a slot on the 737, then out himself on qrewroom telling everyone that he’s just looking after number 1, and disputing that “luck of draw, or right place, right time” has anything to do with this industry. It was embarrassing and probably solidified the belief from most on the 737 of the arrogance and superiority the guys at the top feel they are entitled to. Looking after number 1 can work both ways, so I wouldn’t expect too many on the 737 to much sympathy.

[dragon man]

In that case he is a goose who doesn’t understand his contract and wants to have his cake and eat it to and that’s not going to happen. You take the good with the bad.

[Ruvap]

It doesn’t help when you have a senior LH captain call into a webinar and demand a slot on the 737, then out himself on qrewroom telling everyone that he’s just looking after number 1, and disputing that “luck of draw, or right place, right time” has anything to do with this industry. It was embarrassing and probably solidified the belief from most on the 737 of the arrogance and superiority the guys at the top feel they are entitled to. Looking after number 1 can work both ways, so I wouldn’t expect too many on the 737 to much sympathy.

Agreed!.....and to the moron above, let’s say a 10 day trip to EU is worth 55 hours, that’s 4 sectors or 4 days or 4 times to put your monkey suit on, so I would say, wearing a uniform on 15 occasions every 56 is no exaggeration, the rest of the time being spent as a paid tourist, and you still think you’re worth more!

[ruprecht]

Agreed!.....and to the moron above, let’s say a 10 day trip to EU is worth 55 hours, that’s 4 sectors or 4 days or 4 times to put your monkey suit on, so I would say, wearing a uniform on 15 occasions every 56 is no exaggeration, the rest of the time being spent as a paid tourist, and you still think you’re worth more!
Everyone gets paid in accordance with the award. Plent of ex-SH pilots on the 380 who are (or rather were...) loving it. You sound like a douchebag.

[Ruvap]

After all the good points you made in the Project Sunrise thread regarding sleep and hours worked, you go undo it all by criticising the LH award. The same award that you were holding up as the standard. Yes there are those amongst us who will make you shake your head, but don’t go tearing everything down because of a minority.


Not criticising the LH award, and we’d all be better off but for some of those on the A380 who think the sun shines out of their arses. We will all be better off with the grounding of the A380 and hopefully the gods will not be invited back.

[normanton]

It’s not based on whether you agree, or whether they intend to keep the fleet. The EBA is quite clear on when stand down can occur. FWA are pretty clear that in the case of an EBA covering a situation, they won’t interfere with it.

Union won’t need to do much, if anything. The EBA that was recently voted upon during this pandemic, stands.

Normanton, what QF would like to do, and what they can do, are very different things.

Won’t stop them trying to cut a deal to pull the wool over your eyes where they can though!

LH and SH EBAs are pretty tight - and not in QFs favour. Can’t speak for the other EBAs in the group.
I think you need to re-read the EBA, particular the stand down section mate. No time limits mentioned. No useful work = stood down. Nothing that can be done about it. Good luck trying to convince the executive to spend the “war chest” on that one.

[ruprecht]

Not criticising the LH award, and we’d all be better off but for some of those on the A380 who think the sun shines out of their arses. We will all be better off with the grounding of the A380 and hopefully the gods will not be invited back.
Plenty of good blokes and gals on the A380. Who determines who these “gods” are? You? Or are you just going the nuclear option - sacking the lot to get rid of those you don’t like?
You’re starting to sound unhinged.:rolleyes:

[dragon man]

Agreed!.....and to the moron above, let’s say a 10 day trip to EU is worth 55 hours, that’s 4 sectors or 4 days or 4 times to put your monkey suit on, so I would say, wearing a uniform on 15 occasions every 56 is no exaggeration, the rest of the time being spent as a paid tourist, and you still think you’re worth more!

So now work is only when you put on your uniform so 3 London’s is 30 days on the roster but under your maths only 12 days work. A blank line holder who does 30 standbys a roster but isn’t called out so doesn’t wear a uniform has therefore not worked. You idiot.

[Keg]

Gee there are some right clowns on this forum. There are a number of A380 crew who are amongst the best people on this planet. No one deserves what is occurring at the moment, whether they’re a declared ‘nice person’ or one of Ruvap’s ‘Sky gods’.

[normanton]

The vast majority of 380 pilots are great guys and gals! (but I have definitely run into some w@nkers on the crew bus - my captains words, not mine!)

The current world events and the circumstances we find our self in, has meant the 'gravy train bubble' has come to a swift halt. The new world order will come as a shock, and adapting is required for survival. It will only be temporary, and things will improve.

5 years down the track when 6 of the 380s are officially mothballed, and the 350s come in, you will all be grateful for listening to normantons wise wisdom about just how important it was to secure those 350's in LH10. ;)

[C441]

It doesn’t help when you have a senior LH captain call into a webinar and demand a slot on the 737, then out himself on qrewroom telling everyone that he’s just looking after number 1, and disputing that “luck of draw, or right place, right time” has anything to do with this industry.
Not that it matters, but actually he's not a LH Captain but a 744 F/O with a severely disabled son who was (obviously inadvisedly) voicing his concerns at the plight he has found himself in. If you too are going to denigrate yourself online, at least do some research to verify the accuracy of your statement and include all of the information lest you appear as great a goose as you suggest he is.

And for what it's worth, he's also usually considered one of the nicest blokes you could share a flight deck with…….

5 years down the track when 6 of the 380s are officially mothballed, and the 350s come in, you will all be grateful for listening to normantons wise wisdom about just how important it was to secure those 350's in LH10. ;)

Let's hope the 380s are still here so you can then use the 380 award conditions to offset Tino and Alan's next ultimatum! ;) too :)

[dr dre]

Because stand down can’t be indefinite. At some point it becomes a commercial decision and the clause of stand down won’t apply. Ie When the government no longer has a travel ban / border closure in place.


I’m not sure if this line of thinking will stand up in court, but even then the government restrictions aren’t going to be fully removed for a long time. Several days ago there were comments from the federal government indicating borders may be closed until mid to late 2021. Even when they reopen it won’t be a free for all, I wouldn’t be surprised to see continued restrictions applied against travellers from the US for a period of time after borders are opened to other nations given how bad they’ve handled the outbreak over there.

[SecretAngel]

In that case he is a goose who doesn’t understand his contract and wants to have his cake and eat it to and that’s not going to happen. You take the good with the bad.
Hear hear.

It's a rough time for everyone. Much as I'd love to get parachuted onto SH (or anything...) right now, climbing over the backs of colleagues isn't the way to do it.

[Chad Gates]

Not that it matters, but actually he's not a LH Captain but a 744 F/O with a severely disabled son who was (obviously inadvisedly) voicing his concerns at the plight he has found himself in. If you too are going to denigrate yourself online, at least do some research to verify the accuracy of your statement and include all of the information lest you appear as great a goose as you suggest he is.

And for what it's worth, he's also usually considered one of the nicest blokes you could share a flight deck with…….



Let's hope the 380s are still here so you can then use the 380 award conditions to offset Tino and Alan's next ultimatum! ;) too :)

Understood C441. I don't know the guy, and his position is not really relevant (except his seniority for the purpose of this point). I made an assumption, and I was wrong. That doesn't change the content of his point or the premise on which he made it. My point is that statements like can cause division as is being shown here on this board and it's not helping anyone. Just be careful what you say. We all have our crosses to bare.

And for the record, I never called him a goose. No need to be rude.

[Keg]

It doesn’t help when you have a senior LH captain call into a webinar and demand a slot on the 737, then out himself on qrewroom telling everyone that he’s just looking after number 1,

That’s certainly not how I remember the question. I certainly don’t recall him demanding a seat on the 737 and his post on Qrewroom doesn’t ask for one either. I recall the question (‘the elephant in the room’) was that there are senior crew stood down whilst junior crew are flying and whether there was anything being looked at to try and spread the flying to those crew stood down. It could probably have been phrased more effectively but it’s a legitimate question.

Given he is on a now retired fleet his question is still somewhat relevant but more along the lines of ‘when can I expect to be RIN’d’ so that he can bid for a fleet with some ‘useful work’.

[Icarus2001]

Several days ago there were comments from the federal government indicating borders may be closed until mid to late 2021. That is not my understanding of what has been said.

Do you have a link?

[SOPS]

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/coronavirus/coronavirus-crisis-health-minister-greg-hunt-warns-international-borders-closed-for-very-significant-time-ng-b881586415z

There is one link. This one indicates borders may be shut until we have a vaccine

[OK4Wire]

Then that will probably be never. There's no vaccine for every strain of Flu B, or all the bird flus, or all the other SARS strains.

[crosscutter]

This is embarrassing. Air NZ have actually had forced redundancies...hundreds of them...They have a thread too and somehow they managed to not denigrate the thread into a petty farce.

[PPRuNeUser0184]

Pathetic cowardly behavior. Hard to believe that these people occupy control seats in aircraft.

[Icarus2001]

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/cor...ng-b881586415z (https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/coronavirus/coronavirus-crisis-health-minister-greg-hunt-warns-international-borders-closed-for-very-significant-time-ng-b881586415z)
There is one link. This one indicates borders may be shut until we have a vaccine

Gloriously vague. We have a Chief Medical Officer saying that there is no medical reason for state borders to be closed and yet here we are.

We are not supposed to be aiming for eradication, we are after flattening the curve, remember?

I will be surprised if we cannot travel overseas by Christmas.

[George Glass]

Some thoughts from a survivor of ‘89.

- Its bad . Very bad. Accept it . And deal with it.

- People under stress will say and do things under stress that they will regret for the rest of their lives.
Don’t be one of them.

- The worst possible outcome will be when you start eating your own.

- Circumstances like these are great revealers of character. Behave in a way that you can look back on with pride.

- This too will pass.

[sky rocket]

^^^^ Well said.

[SilverSleuth]

I will be surprised if we cannot travel overseas by Christmas.

get ready to be very surprised !!!!

[ScepticalOptomist]

Once the borders open, if there is still not sufficient forward bookings, Qantas will leave crew stood down as they were going to originally, due to lack of demand - not the closure of the borders. Unfortunately the EA does not address how long crew can remain stood down so arbitration will eventually be needed to determine when the stand down no longer applies.

from the EBA:
“The Company may deduct payments from the pay of an Australian based pilot for any day the pilot cannot be usefully employed because of any strike, stoppage or other limitation of work for which the Company cannot be held responsible...”

I have to disagree. If there aren’t enough bookings once borders are open, that’s a business / commercial problem.

Otherwise, why would ANY company ever pay VR / CR if they could just stand down the employee indefinitely?

[Brakerider]

from the EBA:
“The Company may deduct payments from the pay of an Australian based pilot for any day the pilot cannot be usefully employed because of any strike, stoppage or other limitation of work for which the Company cannot be held responsible...”

I have to disagree. If there aren’t enough bookings once borders are open, that’s a business / commercial problem.

Otherwise, why would ANY company ever pay VR / CR if they could just stand down the employee indefinitely?

Qlink and Rex seem happy enough standing down pilots despite regional travel being permitted by the government.

[dontgive2FACs]

Some thoughts from a survivor of ‘89.

- Its bad . Very bad. Accept it . And deal with it.

- People under stress will say and do things under stress that they will regret for the rest of their lives.
Don’t be one of them.

- The worst possible outcome will be when you start eating your own.

- Circumstances like these are great revealers of character. Behave in a way that you can look back on with pride.

- This too will pass.

I too reiterate these sentiments. Be careful what you say and do - it will be your legacy.

[PPRuNeUser0184]

Circumstances like these are great revealers of character. Behave in a way that you can look back on with pride.


Wise words indeed

[normanton]

from the EBA:
..... or other limitation of work for which the Company cannot be held responsible...”

They are not responsible for no flying due to a pandemic, borders open or not. You are fighting a losing battle.

I recommend you call AIPA legal for further clarification :ok:

[C441]

from the EBA:
“…….other limitation of work for which the Company cannot be held responsible...”

I have to disagree. If there aren’t enough bookings once borders are open, that’s a business / commercial problem.

Otherwise, why would ANY company ever pay VR / CR if they could just stand down the employee indefinitely?

Again I hope you're right but the company will argue that demand has collapsed because of C-19 and thus they "cannot be held responsible".
The opening of borders may not be the trigger to relax stand-downs I'm afraid.

[dr dre]

Again I hope you're right but the company will argue that demand has collapsed because of C-19 and thus they "cannot be held responsible".
The opening of borders may not be the trigger to relax stand-downs I'm afraid.

There’s a lot of ground between the current state of Australians borders being closed to all, and the 2019 state of being open.

When the borders go back to 2019 levels it won’t be done all at once. It’ll be a few neighbouring nations in travel bubbles first, then later other nations which have handled the outbreak well. Nations which haven’t done well at handling the outbreak (US, Brazil for example) will be delayed even further. And even when citizens of those nations are allowed to enter there could be conditions attached. An antibody test, a statement of vaccination, caps on flights and pax numbers from certain countries, a quarantine until a rapid test is performed, limits on the entry of aged or vulnerable populations, limitations on those travellers entering remote and indigenous communities. It may be years until full and free unrestricted travel is back.

[crosscutter]

The border argument can be summarised by the domestic situation. When all domestic borders are opened unrestricted, will all domestic pilots be stood up? I think not.

NSW and VIC borders are open unrestricted. Does that mean all domestic SYD and MEL based pilots have been stood up? No.

Hoping the situation will be different with International is Illogical.

[Callsign Please]

There’s a whole prop fleet stood down in SYD and BNE while the more expensive fleet is gaining routes.

I haven’t yet heard where the extended govt subsidies are being used, but that plus jobkeeper doesn’t make it hard to keep people stood down.

[What-ho Squiffy!]

Erm. If you aren’t into speculation or the circulation of rumors I think you’re on the wrong website.
Every time I come back in for a look, people have to be reminded....

[wheels_down]

They are using larger aircraft because they get a larger government subsidy.

Jetstar flew one passenger into Sunshine Coast today on a flight from Melbourne. What a waste of taxpayer dollars. I mean just charter a freighter for the supplies.

[Ken Borough]

Jetstar flew one passenger into Sunshine Coast today on a flight from Melbourne.

Extraordinary! Seems very odd to me. How many punters were on the outbound flight?

[C441]

They are using larger aircraft because they get a larger government subsidy.

Jetstar flew one passenger into Sunshine Coast today on a flight from Melbourne. What a waste of taxpayer dollars. I mean just charter a freighter for the supplies.
Didn't the government subsidies cease a few weeks ago?

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

Canberra extends aid to support airlines for domestic flightshttps://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/d93392009137a827dba0265bd6ce4f5d?width=650 (https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/d93392009137a827dba0265bd6ce4f5d)The extension of federal government aid will help keep Virgin Australia flying till it completes a sale. Picture: AFP

ROBYN IRONSIDE (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/author/Robyn+Ironside)
AVIATION WRITER
https://i1.wp.com/pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/6e7c15929181150836944cea1b4d0979/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/broadsheet/components/article-author/widget&td_bio=false&td_location=none
12:00AM JUNE 8, 2020
2 COMMENTS (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/canberra-extends-aid-to-support-airlines-for-domestic-flights/news-story/3aafa0441663fd1fdf506acddacc4ff6#coral)

The federal government has extended its financial assistance to the aviation industry for up to six months in a move that will help keep Virgin Australia in the air until a sale is finalised.

Taxpayer-subsidised flights will continue to the end of September on key domestic routes, and until the end of the year for regional airlines.

Announcing the extension of aviation network support, Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack said the funding would not only prop up airlines but protect regional communities.READ NEXT

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/a0a6215f0924ebfee4d749cdfd4a9fe6?width=320 (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/coronavirus-gladys-berejiklian-modelled-border-closures/news-story/d7a67a712e327957243ec976d4c7701a)
EXCLUSIVE
Premier modelled border closures (https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/coronavirus-gladys-berejiklian-modelled-border-closures/news-story/d7a67a712e327957243ec976d4c7701a)
YONI BASHAN

“We don’t want airlines to be flying to various destinations and losing money so what we want to make sure is if we need to ferry around personal protective equipment, face masks and vital medical personnel then there’s the opportunity to do so,” Mr McCormack said.

“What we’re also doing is making sure the airlines have the capacity to do it, keeping jobs in those airlines and giving them hope coming out the back of COVID-19 that there will be a viable aviation industry.”

Since late March, close to $365m had been spent on subsidising domestic and regional flights and Mr McCormack’s office would not say how much had been budgeted for the extension.

Mr McCormack said the latest commitment would take the total funding for the aviation industry to more than $1.2bn across a range of measures designed to lessen the financial impact of crippling COVID-19 travel restrictions.

“I’ve been monitoring the aviation sector on almost an hourly basis, not a daily basis. It’s been something that’s occupied much of my waking hours over recent months and so far so good,” he said.

“Without this assistance, many of those aviation routes would not have seen services and many of the 250,000 people who work in aviation would’ve been out of work with the potential to never go back.”

Qantas and Virgin Australia welcomed the extended support for a minimum domestic network, saying it would allow them to continue to fly to destinations that would otherwise be unviable.

The support was also expected to help cash-strapped Virgin Australia remain in operation until the sale of the airline was finalised. The carrier went into administration on April 21 with debts of $6.8bn and administrators Deloitte have worked hard to find cash to keep Virgin Australia flying.

It’s understood they now have just over $100m, which is expected to see the airline’s bare bones operation through to the end of August.

US companies Bain and Cyrus Capital are vying to buy Virgin Australia for as much as $4bn with final bids due by June 22.

Mr McCormack, who has been under fire from unions for not bailing out Virgin, revealed he was following the administration closely.

“We have two firm bidders in Cyrus and Bain and I’m confident we can come out of this with two commercially viable airlines,” said Mr McCormack.

“I’m certainly confident that our regional airways will be as good as they can be coming out of the back of COVID-19.”

A Virgin Australia spokeswoman said the government’s support for minimal domestic network would allow the airline to increase its network reach and cities served.

“Pleasingly, the extension of the minimal network allows us to keep some team members working throughout the crisis and continue to keep Australia connected during this time,” she said.

“We remain in discussions with the government and hope to have a new contract finalised soon.”

Qantas announced a significant increase in domestic flying last week, coinciding with school holidays and a gradual easing of travel restrictions.

Services will increase from just over 100 return flights a week to more than 300 weekly return flights from June 22, with a further jump in capacity expected in July.

Despite the additional services, a Qantas spokeswoman said the subsidised flights would allow them to conduct interstate and regional services to areas where travel restrictions meant passenger numbers were limited.

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

The government subsidised domestic minimum viable network was extended in June till September, not sure what routes it covers though

[ozbiggles]

Just saw a 380 full noise departures early right turn over the Harbour Bridge bound for the desert I guess...this ain’t over yet is it🙁

[normanton]

VR package is out:

> 15 years service 12 months base pay
> 5 years service 9 months base pay
< 5 years service 6 months base pay

Take LWOP and you will be skipped over if CR is required.

[CaptainInsaneO]

Which group has this been offered to?

And how long is the LWOP period?

[Sparrows.]

Which group has this been offered to?

And how long is the LWOP period?

All long haul pilots.

As little or as long as you’d like, all assessed on an individual basis. HOBO has seen LWOP over his time approved up to about 5 years.
But the question I think you’re getting at, as per the EBA, minimum 12 months LWOP to be passed over for CR.

[maggot]

VR package is out:

> 15 years service 12 months base pay
> 5 years service 9 months base pay
< 5 years service 6 months base pay

Take LWOP and you will be skipped over if CR is required.
more than a years pay when taxed accordingly afaik

buT tHe hOstIeS gEt 14 mOntHs

[Angle of Attack]

No problem swap your 12 months VR with a 14 month Flight attendant payout. It’s not about weeks or months, it’s about the payout, and it’s entirely up to the Company what they offer, anyone saying anything else is full of it. Take it or leave it, it’s pretty bloody simple.

[normanton]

The FA's have it documented in the EBA what a VR payout is.

If you wanted the same amount of weeks that they got you should have negotiated it into EBA 10.

It's a stupid argument when your wage is xxx higher.

[JamieMaree]

The FA's have it documented in the EBA what a VR payout is.

If you wanted the same amount of weeks that they got you should have negotiated it into EBA 10.

It's a stupid argument when your wage is xxx higher.


QF pilots didn’t have any redundancy provisions until the CWD.
If it is voluntary it is voluntary. Stop whinging if the bait is not attractive enough.
I’d be happy if it was good enough to get angryrat, going boeing, Vjet, et al.
More to the point, if they are as unhappy as they portray, they should do the honourable thing and resign.

[dr dre]

No problem swap your 12 months VR with a 14 month Flight attendant payout. It’s not about weeks or months, it’s about the payout, and it’s entirely up to the Company what they offer, anyone saying anything else is full of it. Take it or leave it, it’s pretty bloody simple.

In 2014 the Union thought the Company’s offer was far less than what was needed to entice enough pilots to take it. They were wrong. And that was when there was an option to keep flying and earning a wage for those targeted for VR. Now there’s stand downs:

polling had found Qantas needed to offer a base salary figure of closer to 24 months - with 18 months as a minimum - to address its concerns of having surplus pilots.


Pilots not happy with Qantas redundancy offer (https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/pilots-not-happy-with-qantas-redundancy-offer-20140519-38jo4.html)

[SandyPalms]

They will have no trouble getting enough takers. I predict it will be oversubscribed. As dr Dre says, they had enough when there was flying to be done.

Once those eligible make peace with the fact that it’s not a reflection of what QF think you are worth, and simply a number QF think you will take, they will reflect on the alternative, and take what’s on offer. It’s a no brainer.

[Keg]

In 2014 the Union thought the Company’s offer was far less than what was needed to entice enough pilots to take it. They were wrong. And that was when there was an option to keep flying and earning a wage for those targeted for VR. Now there’s stand downs:



Pilots not happy with Qantas redundancy offer (https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/pilots-not-happy-with-qantas-redundancy-offer-20140519-38jo4.html)

AIPA was correct on that one. They reckoned it needed to be higher to get 100 applicants for VR. Qantas only received about 52 applications for that one. They still seemed happy with the outcome though. I suspect they’ll be happy with this one too whether the number is 100 or 200.

Those over 63.5 will get an offer soon I suspect. An ‘early retirement’ is taxed slightly differently to VR but still better than marginal tax rates- the ATO guidance on this is appalling! Even if the offer was for the leave they accrue between now and 65 and bundled in with their accrued leave (if they have any) they’re still likely to be better off than remaining on stand down between now and 65th birthday.

[TimmyTee]

So, if you take the 12 month LWOP to avoid being made redundant, what happens if after the 12 months you come back, intl is still dead in the water, and the company a month later makes you redundant “due to new review on impact of the virus” or whatever.. How long does the ‘amnesty’ on redundancy for those who take the LWOP option legally last? Anything other than a legal clarification surely wouldn’t be acceptable to opt into it?

[normanton]

So, if you take the 12 month LWOP to avoid being made redundant, what happens if after the 12 months you come back, intl is still dead in the water, and the company a month later makes you redundant “due to new review on impact of the virus” or whatever.. How long does the ‘amnesty’ on redundancy for those who take the LWOP option legally last? Anything other than a legal clarification surely wouldn’t be acceptable to opt into it?
Then you get made redundant when you come back from LWOP.

I hope the company is prepared for the onslaught of LWOP applications they are about to receive!

[PPRuNeUser0184]

What is the benefit of taking LWOP? Why not just stay stood down and accrue leave and get JK?

[SandyPalms]

For the “super junior” in either LH or SH, taking LWOP will protect you from being made redundant. i think the way they have set this up is smart (from the company’s side). They will surely get hundreds of the senior guys to take VR, while at the same time, scaring juniour blokes into taking LWOP to try and not be made compulsorily redundant.

[No Idea Either]

JK will not last forever KZK. If it’s extended, probably only another 3-6 months. After that standown is standown, ie, no useful work no pay. Bit different here than ENZED I believe. You could be stood-down for three years with no pay, but you will retain your spot in the list and accrue benefits such as annual, long service and personal leave. Still have the curly one of exactly how long can you be stood down.........3 months, 6 months......3 years!!!!! Surely someone would challenge it if it just goes on and on.

Genuine question people........how does the amnesty clause fit in with your EA??

[cloudsurfng]

For the “super junior” in either LH or SH, taking LWOP will protect you from being made redundant. i think the way they have set this up is smart (from the company’s side). They will surely get hundreds of the senior guys to take VR, while at the same time, scaring juniour blokes into taking LWOP to try and not be made compulsorily redundant.

why would a junior SH pilot be made redundant? QF have stated there is no forecast surplus in SH....what am I missing?

[SandyPalms]

Don't know surfer dude. I think the jury is still out on what happens in seniority when we get to a CR. Not tying to be alarmist, but have they said that they will not use the seniority list for CR? What does a "forecast surplus" mean with regard to CR?

[cloudsurfng]

Ah ok. In a webinair it was touched on, but QF consider LH and SH completely separate for redundancy. The integration agreement just says ‘new hire’ pilots go first in accordance with the Pilots Agreement (ie where the surplus is). I haven’t read the A/Q stuff in great detail but I believe the ‘Y’ starts somewhere around seniority 600....if it gets that far I’d say it’s game over anyway! Of course, I’d expect this to be challenged.

hopefully we never have to find out.

[ruprecht]

You have less than 4 weeks to be on LWOP to avoid inclusion in a potential CR:


LWOP to commence no later than 7 August 2020 (x-apple-data-detectors://8);



The win for the company is you no longer accrue leave. I’m still unsure if you can get jobkeeper when on LWOP.

Good luck out there...

[ROH111]

Are you guys (and girls) saying that:

If you are on LWOP, you can not be made redundant?


Upon your return you might be made redundant.... but then you’d just extend your LWOP wouldn’t you?

[ruprecht]

Upon your return you might be made redundant.... but then you’d just extend your LWOP wouldn’t you?

I imagine your LWOP extension would have to be approved.

[ruprecht]

Are you guys (and girls) saying that:


If you are on LWOP, you can not be made redundant?

From our email:

To provide you with further clarity regarding the LWOP offering, I can confirm that we will exercise our discretion to pass over any pilot on LWOP should it become necessary to enact a CR program, subject to the following conditions:

LWOP application must be submitted on or after 31 March 2020;
LWOP to commence no later than 7 August 2020 (x-apple-data-detectors://8);
LWOP application is for a period greater than 12 months; and
The pilot is on this period of LWOP at the time that CRs are notified.

[SandyPalms]

Are you guys (and girls) saying that:

If you are on LWOP, you can not be made redundant?


Upon your return you might be made redundant.... but then you’d just extend your LWOP wouldn’t you?

Yes. The intention presumably is to get Junior folk to go on LWOP indefinitely (obviously the longer the better to avoid the possibility of coming off LWOP just to be made redundant on your return) until there is work for them, which stops the accrual of leave entitlements and I'd suspect simplifies to operation. How much is 6 weeks of leave a year worth, compared to the possibility of CR? I don't know. The 7th of August is the same day the VR applications close, so we won't know how many have taken it when we are supposed to already be on LWOP to avoid CR. You have to admit, it's industrially brilliant.
Forewarned is forearmed, as they say.

[ROH111]

Is that a company email? I haven’t seen it

[SandyPalms]

Yes, from base operations yesterday morning.

[normanton]

The company wants people to stop accruing leave entitlements by forcing us on LWOP. Don't do it and you run the risk of a CR notice landing in your inbox.

This isn't just targeted at the junior crew for what its worth. If the bottom 400 recently hired SO's all take LWOP (and you would be stupid not to take it), guess who they are coming after next.

Its a threat to everyone. Want a future at Qantas? You have 4 weeks to take LWOP.

[Going Boeing]

More to the point, if they are as unhappy as they portray, they should do the honourable thing and resign.

Jamie, don't misinterpret my calling out the corruption of senior QF management as "being unhappy" - I have thoroughly enjoyed my career and feel privileged to have been selected quite a few years ago.

You don't have to be a naive "yes" man to enjoy your career.

[SandyPalms]

The company wants people to stop accruing leave entitlements by forcing us on LWOP. Don't do it and you run the risk of a CR notice landing in your inbox.

This isn't just targeted at the junior crew for what its worth. If the bottom 400 recently hired SO's all take LWOP (and you would be stupid not to take it), guess who they are coming after next.

Its a threat to everyone. Want a future at Qantas? You have 4 weeks to take LWOP.

Yep, the more people take LWOP, the higher up the ladder the crocodile can climb. All depending on how many stay comfortably on the top. A number we won't know until it's conceivably too late. Fark.

[ruprecht]

Yep, the more people take LWOP, the higher up the ladder the crocodile can climb. All depending on how many stay comfortably on the top. A number we won't know until it's conceivably too late. Fark.

But the more LWOP taken, the fewer redundancies required.

LWOP is cheap, CR is expensive.

[34R]

The premise behind the whole 'you're safe if you take LWOP" notion is a disgrace.

If CR's are required why is somebody on LWOP exempt? Why does it have to come down to a gamble? If 100 junior people are in danger of being made redundant, and the company are serious about retaining people with a substantial portion of their career ahead of them, why not give them the option of taking LWOP if it is envisaged that their departure is ACTUALLY required?

[Bug Smasher Smasher]

Yep, the more people take LWOP, the higher up the ladder the crocodile can climb. All depending on how many stay comfortably on the top. A number we won't know until it's conceivably too late. Fark.
I don’t think anyone at the top is particularly comfortable right now.

For those sweating CR, remember the company has repeatedly said that CR will be viewed as a failure on their part. After VR there is still the option to apply “flexibility” to the EA. Whatever that means.

[normanton]

But the more LWOP taken, the fewer redundancies required.
Nope! Not at all.

The company has stated they have a surplus of 190 pilots in mainline. This does not include anyone due to retire by the 1st July 2022. If that is say 58 pilots, the real surplus here is 190 + 58 = 248.

The 190 surplus pilots are being targeted by the VR program. LWOP will not affect this. LWOP is being used to manage the short to medium term pilot surplus (refer Q56 in the FAQ document).

If they do not get 190 pilots by the VR offer, they will start CR's. LWOP will not affect this.

For what its worth, if the most recently hired LH SO's all take LWOP, the company will be going up the list, and the next people in line were hired in Jan 2009.

[normanton]

The premise behind the whole 'you're safe if you take LWOP" notion is a disgrace.

If CR's are required why is somebody on LWOP exempt? Why does it have to come down to a gamble? If 100 junior people are in danger of being made redundant, and the company are serious about retaining people with a substantial portion of their career ahead of them, why not give them the option of taking LWOP if it is envisaged that their departure is ACTUALLY required?
Because the company is playing an IR game. Get as many people on LWOP ASAP to reduce the cost base of QF international.

[ROH111]

I took a divisor cut when Dixon asked the pilots to raise $8m. Other second officers didn’t.

I took LWOP and went to Jetstar for 6 years. These same Second Officers didn’t.

I went to short haul and these guys have stayed on as second officers and we’re recently awarded FO slots in long haul.


Ive done my bit. In 12 years I’ve done my bit,

I want to name names, but I won’t.

Why can’t they all just piss off take LWOP and help out, but, as it’s proven before, they won’t. And they know who they are.

[Variable Incidence]

Why not just get CR’d? Money in your pocket and then a guarantee of sorts, when/if things pick up in the next few years you have to be re-employed, before brand newbies?! Just going on LWOP plays into the Co’s Hands!

[ruprecht]

Nope! Not at all.

The company has stated they have a surplus of 190 pilots in mainline. This does not include anyone due to retire by the 1st July 2022. If that is say 58 pilots, the real surplus here is 190 + 58 = 248.

The 190 surplus pilots are being targeted by the VR program. LWOP will not affect this. LWOP is being used to manage the short to medium term pilot surplus (refer Q56 in the FAQ document).

If they do not get 190 pilots by the VR offer, they will start CR's. LWOP will not affect this.

For what its worth, if the most recently hired LH SO's all take LWOP, the company will be going up the list, and the next people in line were hired in Jan 2009.

So if CR is unavoidable, why are they offering LWOP at all? It would be cheaper to CR the most junior.

[normanton]

So if CR is unavoidable, why are they offering LWOP at all? It would be cheaper to CR the most junior.
I don't actually agree.

Making 100 junior pilots CR compared to having A LOT of pilots on LWOP + doing CR eventually is a bigger saving to the company.

[ruprecht]

I don't actually agree.

Making 100 junior pilots CR compared to having A LOT of pilots on LWOP + doing CR eventually is a bigger saving to the company.

Not as cheap as CR for the most junior, and LWOP for the rest.

As you pointed out, this is clearly being driven by IR and the aim appears to scare junior members onto LWOP, and I think it’s to avoid paying CR.

Time will tell I guess, have a good weekend.

[PPRuNeUser0184]

JK will not last forever KZK. If it’s extended, probably only another 3-6 months. After that standown is standown, ie, no useful work no pay. Bit different here than ENZED I believe. You could be stood-down for three years with no pay, but you will retain your spot in the list and accrue benefits such as annual, long service and personal leave. Still have the curly one of exactly how long can you be stood down.........3 months, 6 months......3 years!!!!! Surely someone would challenge it if it just goes on and on.

Genuine question people........how does the amnesty clause fit in with your EA??

I realise that. But until JK or whatever new version Scomo comes up with runs out I won’t be taking LWOP. I’ve taken LWOP twice back post GFC to “save redundancy”......I’m done with it. If it gets to CR for me after 17 years then so be it. Pay me my cash and I’m out of here

[dr dre]

Why not just get CR’d? Money in your pocket and then a guarantee of sorts, when/if things pick up in the next few years you have to be re-employed, before brand newbies?! Just going on LWOP plays into the Co’s Hands!

Being CR’d means you’re no longer an employee and you’re no longer with the group. The company has no responsibility for you and won’t look after your welfare. Yes, you are first to be hired when it picks up but that means having HR approve more recruitment which may not happen for a while. Any pilot getting made CR would only pick up a few weeks pay anyway.

Better to be on the inside looking out than vice versa. As the most junior are 330 and 787 SOs they’ll be the first back once international flying resumes if the remain within the system, if they’re on the outside looking in it may be a long time.

why would a junior SH pilot be made redundant? QF have stated there is no forecast surplus in SH....what am I missing?

That was addressed recently. LH and SH are separate. CR would only affect LH pilots as that is where the surplus is.

[Fujiroll76]

Wouldn't it be nice if the company provided a little transparency on the numbers interested in the VR EOI. But lets be honest with ourselves..

With the LWOP get out of jail free card needing to commence prior to the binding VR submissions, a calculated decision is a risky move...but lets crunch the numbers and see how we go -


If you were 63 or older as of July 1 - Lets rule out those who would be silly not to take the elusive "Retirement Package" Approx 50 pilots


60 to 61 - 65

61 to 62 - 59

62 to 63 - 50

Gives you approximately - 170 who would be considering the package very closely. Now I don't have the data on LHvSH age split, but for arguments sake lets assume 20% are SH pilots who are ineligible - Left with around 140 give or take.


Then you have the 60-61 year olds who may run the gamble of holding out and getting back into a seat for 12-18 months (Im assuming most would be 380 pilots who may face 2-3 years on the bench and get a call up at 63-64)

- Holding a class 1, passing the line training on a different fleet after 3 years off and getting the boot without a severance would be a hard and sad way to go out.


Then you have the 55+ crew who will be happy with a few hundred thousand to hang up the wings and continue with their side career or those who just want to enjoy retirement fairly comfortably.


In my opinion I believe the 190 figure will be surpassed. Will the company approve more than 190? No.

Will there be a need for CR? No.

Will the company push for EA negotiations to get more crew stood up when the time comes? Yes

Can they put a date on when these "temporary" variations conclude? No, but this will be monitored extremely closely.


The data above represent figures to 2025 regarding retirements turned into VR

Its no secret that natural attrition will come into play excessively in the years that follow.

2026-2030 - 400


By the time to VR and early retirement has played out we would've reduced the pilot body by around 250 pilots.

2000 will remain reduced to 1600 by 2030 (20%) *Recruitment door closed for several years one would assume.


The company has done what they do best...cast doubt in ones mind. Who can forget the threat of a seperate entity to fly Sunrise only a handful of months ago! the same has happened here. Take LWOP and pass up your leave accruals and we will give you a golden ticket just incase we need to run a CR.


Keg - You seem to have your finger on the pulse - Happy to have your thoughts?


Its a horrid time for our industry and this WILL pass - Stay safe and look after eachoth...sorry I've watched too many Town Halls :)



Fuji

[Capt Fathom]

Fujiroll76

Are you suggesting that someone over 60, who has time off due to the present downturn, is incapable of passing their medical and getting through a new type course?

[No Idea Either]

Sorry KZ Kiwi, I thought you were in NZ. I suppose you’re from NZ But in AUS.

[TimmyTee]

I think someone asked if JobKeeper would be paid to those who voluntarily take LWOP (as opposed to the current stand down provisions).
There is not a chance in hell the government would allow this. That $1500 a fortnight would instantly vanish the day you commence LWOP (including any further extension in some sort of potential Aviation keeper form)

I'm still confused about what protections you'd have as a junior pilot who takes LWOP now, only to return in 12 months and be CR soon after if the business is still down? Why not say as a group "if CRs are going to commence, then we will enforce LWOP in reverse seniority? Seems much fairer

[ozbiggles]

Unless you are on the bottom of the list

[Emmit Stussy]

Now I don't have the data on LHvSH age split, but for arguments sake lets assume 20% are SH pilots who are ineligible

Fuji, not sure I understand your hypothesis.
I agree that all SH pilots are ineligible for VR, but as there are no SH pilots in LH where does the 20% come from?

[normanton]

I think someone asked if JobKeeper would be paid to those who voluntarily take LWOP (as opposed to the current stand down provisions).
There is not a chance in hell the government would allow this. That $1500 a fortnight would instantly vanish the day you commence LWOP (including any further extension in some sort of potential Aviation keeper form)

You sure about that?

https://coronavirus.fairwork.gov.au/coronavirus-and-australian-workplace-laws/pay-and-leave-during-coronavirus/jobkeeper-wage-subsidy-scheme/leave-the-jobkeeper-scheme

Unpaid leaveAn eligible employee on authorised unpaid leave must receive at least the amount of the JobKeeper payment from their qualifying employer for the period they’re on unpaid leave, if they meet the eligibility conditions for the JobKeeper scheme.

HR even confirmed that you are entitled to JobKeeper whilst on LWOP. What HR did say is that they are not sure if it would continue with any extension to JobKeeper, or a new wage subsidy that the government brings in.

[ExtraShot]

That was addressed recently. LH and SH are separate. CR would only affect LH pilots as that is where the surplus is

That may have been TLS’s/managements wish or interpretation, but I’m not sure it’s as cut and dry as ‘you’re in SH, you’re safe’...

See WK’s post on Qrewroom.

[maggot]

That may have been TLS’s/managements wish or interpretation, but I’m not sure it’s as cut and dry as ‘you’re in SH, you’re safe’...

See WK’s post on Qrewroom.
this.
sadly.

but it probably depends on your lawyers bill size

[Fujiroll76]

Fujiroll76

Are you suggesting that someone over 60, who has time off due to the present downturn, is incapable of passing their medical and getting through a new type course?

Not at all

I am simply stating the obvious that any pilot who has a lengthy period away from aviation would struggle.
Ill go out on a limb here and say that the older you get the harder it becomes to keep CASA away and a Class 1 doesnt come as easy as they once did. Incapable? No.......Hurdles? Yes

[Fujiroll76]

Fuji, not sure I understand your hypothesis.
I agree that all SH pilots are ineligible for VR, but as there are no SH pilots in LH where does the 20% come from?

Well the jury is still out on that but yes for this I did not include in the surplus.
The figures used were based on the "65 Graph" issued by AIPA - Im not aware that this graph is solely LH pilots or a mixture of both SH and LH pilots reaching 65.

I assumed it was a mix and (weighted 80/20) This is my own assumption which i believe to be fairly accurate but happy to be advised otherwise.

[dr dre]

That may have been TLS’s/managements wish or interpretation, but I’m not sure it’s as cut and dry as ‘you’re in SH, you’re safe’...

See WK’s post on Qrewroom.

There’s only 5 provisions of the Long Haul Agreement that apply to pilots who have transferred to Short Haul operations under 20.4 of the LH agreement. None of them deal with redundancy.

The Integration Agreement only specifies that new hire pilots be retrenched in accordance the Pilots Agreement, LH EBA. It doesn’t address those new hire pilots who transferred over to Short Haul. Unless it was one of the 5 provisions of the LH EBA that carried over nothing in the LH EBA will apply to a SH pilot. The SH EBA refers to redundancies if a pilot’s “position” becomes redundant. As no SH pilot is being offered VR then no SH positions are redundant.

However I’m not an IR lawyer, and I’ll assume no one else is. So it’ll probably end up in court anyway if it gets to the point of CR (I’m still fairly sure it won’t however which is the best thing for all).

[cloudsurfng]

Re WK post on qrewroom, he says redundancy will happen in accordance with the pilots agreement, EA10. A SH pilot isn’t employed under EA 10.

I really don’t think this is going to be a short term issue, however if this **** continues or gets worse it may. The company’s position is that SH is not going to be included if there are CR’s now. I’d believe their IR lawyers been through this in great detail, and that their position is pretty solid. The other side is that if SH shrinks, then any LH pilot will not be included.

Remember there are other mechanisms available before redundancy (ie temporary EA variations).

[Green.Dot]

As Fuji said they should run the VR first.

If they get the required numbers, great and all of us can take a chill pill.

Problem is let’s say they even fall 20 numbers short. How many people in the bottom 100 are going to risk being the one not to take LWOP? And what about the next 100 pilots above them? As SandyPalms said- how far will the crocodile climb?

This is a very dirty tactic, but it’s in the EBA.

[Wingspar]

I think everyone’s barking at shadows here.
The company don’t want CR because it might start a fight.
All the options they’re providing will achieve their goals. Infact they will probably turn people down.
It is a bit naughty to offer the LWOP to protect ones position. They know the bottom few hundred will jump at it though.
That I don’t like but they’re not friends. It’s business to them. Pure and simple.
By the way when will they advise the results?
All I saw was that the binding commitment was valid for up to three months?

[Fonz121]

Jobkeeper definitely applies to lwop as it stands. If any continuation of JK is the same then lwop is a bit of a no-brainer for junior guys imo. But who’s to say how junior will be junior once everyone at the bottom absconds to secure their jobs.

If any new jobkeeper doesn’t include lwop then the company are essentially forcing us to choose between job security and a minimal wage which for a lot of us is the difference between scraping by or not. This would be a bit of a dick move by the company. I would prefer to stay stood down with no leave accrual to keep JK.

Also how does it work if a LH pilot is made redundant (compulsory) and there are say 50 SH pilots below them. Does that pilot then get rehired at the bottom of the list losing 50 spots?

[Bug Smasher Smasher]

Also how does it work if a LH pilot is made redundant (compulsory) and there are say 50 SH pilots below them. Does that pilot then get rehired at the bottom of the list losing 50 spots?
No.

From the Agreement:

A pilot re-employed will resume the relative position on the pilot seniority list that he or she occupied as at the time of termination of employment due to redundancy.

[Poto]

Re WK post on qrewroom, he says redundancy will happen in accordance with the pilots agreement, EA10. A SH pilot isn’t employed under EA 10.

I really don’t think this is going to be a short term issue, however if this **** continues or gets worse it may. The company’s position is that SH is not going to be included if there are CR’s now. I’d believe their IR lawyers been through this in great detail, and that their position is pretty solid. The other side is that if SH shrinks, then any LH pilot will not be included.

Remember there are other mechanisms available before redundancy (ie temporary EA variations).
The Integration Agreement sits above both the LH & SH award. It’s the mechanism that allows crew to move between awards. No one signs a new employment contract when they move between awards because the IA puts you under the same umbrella. The Last on first off redundancy rules come from this agreement.

[Koizi]

Apologies if I've missed something, but how (even leaving SH pilots out of the argument) does being on LWOP allow the company to circumvent LH seniority regarding possible CRs?

[SandyPalms]

If it comes to CR, it seems QF will try and Silo both sides. This is their desire, as the 737 pilots are the ones they will need soon. It will end up in court, and I think the IA will win. It will be straight seniority.

Great point Koizi. I don’t think that legal either.

so much of this is still so dependent on whether the SH and LH lists can be separated when it comes to CR. WK (who is the bloke who wrote the IA) thinks it’s not possible. It needs to be tested in court, and that could be a long process.

[Keg]

There are about 200 LH pilots over the age of 60.

The top 40 are over 63.5 and will get an ‘early retirement’ offer. It’s still likely to pay more than being ‘stood down’.

The next 40 are between 62.5 and 63.5. It’s a relative no brainer that they will be far better off financially taking the deal on offer. Even 61.5 (another 50) is probably better off to take it if they have more than a couple of months leave up their sleeve.

The remaining 70? Line ball call as to whether the flying picks up enough for them to make more than the VR offer on the table. Give the impact that a lump sum payment can have into your bank account I suspect the offer will be enough for at least half of them to take it. 165 in total. There may be some crew under the age of 60 who have a look at the deal too so perhaps another 5-10 there.

So I suspect Qantas will go pretty close to getting the 190-200 they’re after.

Unless they have a job contract to go to, any junior pilot should sit on their hands until the VR process plays out and avoid taking LWOP. Under CR Qantas pays a minimum of 6 months (this would apply to anyone hired since 2016) and you have a right of return as per the EA. Take LWOP and you get no accrued leave, no credited years towards LSL, a future CR won’t include any credit for time taken LWOP, etc. Until AIPA is able to have input into this LWOP and get a few quid pro quo’s for helping the company out you’d be nuts to just jump in the hope that it’d save your job.

Of course if you have a 2, 3, 5 year contract on the table and want some certainty for the next few years then go for it! Little to lose in that situation. Though if you really wanted to ‘play the system’ you could hold off applying for LWOP and continue to accrue leave and years of service and then take the LWOP a little further down the track. A strategy not without risk!

[pig dog]

Koizi/Sandy Palms, it is legal. Have a read of 15.10 of the EA, it’s all spelt out there. It also addresses re-employment after CR etc. Might I suggest to all at QF having to navigate through this time that a good read of that section of the award is worth a lot more than trawling through all the assumptions and opinions put forward on PPRuNe.

[Fujiroll76]

Apologies if I've missed something, but how (even leaving SH pilots out of the argument) does being on LWOP allow the company to circumvent LH seniority regarding possible CRs?

Its absolutely ridiculous.

Yes some crew may have other options outside Qantas who will explore the LWOP option and get their golden ticket. BUT the vast majority don't. So its either hand up your entitlements and get a ticket too or stay stood down and accrue your leave BUT you may be made CR......but we can't tell you until its too late.

Dirty tactics

[cloudsurfng]

The Integration Agreement sits above both the LH & SH award. It’s the mechanism that allows crew to move between awards. No one signs a new employment contract when they move between awards because the IA puts you under the same umbrella. The Last on first off redundancy rules come from this agreement.

that is not the opinion of the company. Believe me, they have explored this in great detail. Hopefully we won’t have to find out.

[normanton]

I think the argument of not getting your entitlement accrual while on LWOP is a wish washy point as we all know the company will be going after that anyway with temporary EBA amendments.

To be clear to everyone, the company's view is that CR will come from LH only.

AIPA really needs to provide more information.

[Poto]

The Company has had ‘Its position’ changed quite a few times during this pandemic. I would expect this one will be no different if they commence CR.

[dr dre]

The integration award was the award that allowed seamless transfer between two seperate agreements. It is very specific on how existing pilots (at the time the IA was written) will be treated in respect of redundancy, but it only provides pilots hired after it’s implementation with a brief sentence saying they are to be retrenched first. It doesn’t provide any specifics on what order those new hire pilots will be retrenched.

One could argue in court that the provisions between Q and A pilots in the IA should be applied to new hire pilots as well, which would mean all CR is quarantined to LH. One could also argue SH pilots cannot be bound by provisions of a LH EBA that they cannot vote on, unless it’s written those provisions specifically apply to them.

A court could determine that it is a grey area and the company and AIPA have to sort it out amongst themselves with something definitive.

IMO the overarching statement is the one saying “a pilots position becomes redundant” in the applicable EBA. As no SH pilots have been offered VR, then no SH pilot’s position has become redundant.

Agreement discussions notwithstanding don’t forget there’s also legal precedent in Australia for not applying seniority in redundancy (Kendell).

[Poto]

Read the Kendal airlines decision. Not a precedent at all

[dr dre]

Read the Kendal airlines decision. Not a precedent at all

It’s not an exact precedent for this situation (nothing ever is) but it is an example of when the Industrial Relations Commission in 2002 sided with a company over a union over the issue of seniority “having regard to likely additional costs and disruption in the context of presently tenuous airline operations” (those words from the AIRC decision). Just after Ansett collapsed there were then “tenuous” airline operations in Australia, as there are now. It involved a court case over actions outside of strict seniority, and the court did side with the company over the union citing prohibitive costs.

But I don’t think this line would be perused in court, I think if it did end up in court it’ll come down to what is written in current agreements.

And again, I firmly believe no CR will be required at all. The package is pretty generous enough and I think it’ll be oversubscribed.

[ozbiggles]

And that is the major point out of the Drs example. In the end the court will fall on the side of the greater good. In this case keeping the company (any company) viable, even if that means upsetting a few people. I think most companies will have a relatively easy case to prove what is a more cost effective way to help them survive and thus provide more employment in the longer run and the courts have already shown they will rule that way if it is a grey area.

[Emmit Stussy]

Fuji,
Sorry if I’m being obtuse, but I still don’t get it.

Well the jury is still out on that....
The jury is still out on what?

By definition, Short Haul pilots are those who fly the 737 and Long Haul pilots are everybody else.
So how can 20% of LH pilots be ineligible for VR?

[Keg]

Ozbiggles, AIPA can easily argue that making a SH F/O redundant (in seniority) won’t have a material impact on the SH business given the business is only flying 20, 30, 40, 50% of it’s normal flying anyway. Even as they ramp back up towards 100% it will simply mean slightly higher divisors for F/Os. I don’t think the ‘business detriment’ is going to be a valid argument by Qantas in that context.

Interestingly I reckon it’d be much cheaper for Qantas to make the bottom 250-300 redundant than offer VR. Any subsequent uptick in flying can be dealt with using heavy crew (2+2 or 1+2+1). At this stage we’d be insane to negotiate/ vote away the accrual of leave at normal rates whilst stood down or on reduced divisors. It’s a small price for Qantas to pay so that they have at it’s disposal a pilot workforce ready to go when things pick up.

[LTBC]

CR can’t create a vacancy otherwise the position was never actually redundant.

This alone means SH is quarantined from a LH surplus.

[ozbiggles]

Hi Keg, I don’t disagree with you or the logic. I only make the point any argument against ‘company’ logic starts behind the 8 ball. No body had Pandemics in mind when agreements where written and there is ample case law which suggests courts will rule in favour of companies if the company can argue the costs would be ‘unreasonable’ compared to other options, particularly if they can ‘show’ more people will be disadvantaged.

The only sure thing is 2020 might not be the worst year, but it has to be top 5 in that category for aviation.

[Poto]

CR can’t create a vacancy otherwise the position was never actually redundant.

This alone means SH is quarantined from a LH surplus.

Unless All of SH is flying above the Divisor trigger for the promulgation of Vacancies then that will make no difference at all. We all know that is some time off.

[Poto]

It’s not an exact precedent for this situation (nothing ever is) but it is an example of when the Industrial Relations Commission in 2002 sided with a company over a union over the issue of seniority “having regard to likely additional costs and disruption in the context of presently tenuous airline operations” (those words from the AIRC decision). Just after Ansett collapsed there were then “tenuous” airline operations in Australia, as there are now. It involved a court case over actions outside of strict seniority, and the court did side with the company over the union citing prohibitive costs.

But I don’t think this line would be perused in court, I think if it did end up in court it’ll come down to what is written in current agreements.

And again, I firmly believe no CR will be required at all. The package is pretty generous enough and I think it’ll be oversubscribed.

The Court ‘sided’ with the Administrator. Not the Company. They were already in administration. The main finding was that the redundancy provisions effectively meant that no pilot could be made redundant ever. Therefore a decision had to be made. It was the poorly written redundancy provisions that brought them undone.

[Give it the herbs]

Fuji,
Sorry if I’m being obtuse, but I still don’t get it.


The jury is still out on what?

By definition, Short Haul pilots are those who fly the 737 and Long Haul pilots are everybody else.
So how can 20% of LH pilots be ineligible for VR?

The age group that fuji is talking about includes both SH and LH pilots, he isn't saying 20% are ineligible. The assumption is 20% of pilots in that age group are probably SH pilots and are therefore not eligible for VR. 20% is a very reasonable assumption IMO, maybe more.

[Emmit Stussy]

The age group that fuji is talking about includes both SH and LH pilots, he isn't saying 20% are ineligible. The assumption is 20% of pilots in that age group are probably SH pilots and are therefore not eligible for VR. 20% is a very reasonable assumption IMO, maybe more.

But there aren’t any SH pilots in LH, nil-none-nada

Maybe I’m not explaining this correctly.

If an A380 S/O moves to B737 F/O is that person in now in short haul or still in long haul?
If a B737 Capt moves to B787 Capt is that person still in short haul or are they now in long haul?

[cloudsurfng]

The Integration Agreement sits above both the LH & SH award. It’s the mechanism that allows crew to move between awards. No one signs a new employment contract when they move between awards because the IA puts you under the same umbrella. The Last on first off redundancy rules come from this agreement.

has the IA been modernised and is it FWC approved? Nope.

[Poto]

has the IA been modernised and is it FWC approved? Nope.
has a replacement been written or has the IA been cancelled? Nope

[Blueskymine]

CR can’t create a vacancy otherwise the position was never actually redundant.

This alone means SH is quarantined from a LH surplus.

^ This is what the company legal advice straight from FW would be.

So yes, Shorthaul will be isolated from a LH surplus.

If there’s a surplus in Shorthaul and it gets to CR the same will apply. A senior FO can’t displace a junior pilot from LH.

[cloudsurfng]

has a replacement been written or has the IA been cancelled? Nope

cool, you stick with yours, I’ll stick with mine, and for the sake of everyone let’s hope we never find out who is right.

[Troo believer]

But there aren’t any SH pilots in LH, nil-none-nada

Maybe I’m not explaining this correctly.

If an A380 S/O moves to B737 F/O is that person in now in short haul or still in long haul?
If a B737 Capt moves to B787 Capt is that person still in short haul or are they now in long haul?
The only pilots effectively protected and have a right to return to short haul are “A” list pilots. Their jobs in this scenario are protected since short haul flying appears to be viable at the moment. Everyone else is subject to seniority provisions either above or below the Y. If for arguments sake, that Qantas retracted to the point of only being a domestic carrier, then the “A” list pilots would have first claim under the IA then followed by very senior Q pilots then everyone below the Y. There are probably less than 100 “A”pilots left however from pre integration of Qantas and Australian Airlines. I may be wrong but regardless of which haul you could still be subject to CR but the company will argue against that hence no VR for short haul. Last on first off is the way it should play out IMO if it comes to that. Hopefully it doesn’t. Bring on a vaccine. Living in a NZ OZ bubble is pure folly and will only prolong the economic consequences as reality bites.

[Poto]

Not a single SH pilot since the creation of the Integration agreement has signed an employment contract to fly in SH. It’s a secondment under the larger Mainline Umbrella.

That is why QF have the Master seniority list.

As for the vacancy argument, What vacancies would be created in the foreseeable future if a bunch of Junior SH F/O’s were unfortunate enough to be suffer CR? Answer-none. Same as their will be nowhere for a 65yr to Go,
Hence retirement for them.

As for the Costs? The Payout for a Junior SH F/O will be quite a bit less than more Senior LH S/O or F/O (relatively speaking). Retraining costs for a future SH Vacancy? A significant amount of LH crews (S/O’s aside) would need some refamil sims and a week of line sectors to be back in that Seat. Not even the difference between the 2 CR payouts. How much would a Court challenge cost? Quite a bit for both parties.

Whilst Tino might have his thoughts, I wonder if he knows what the IA is? Or even that it Exists?

Does the a pilot Body really want Seniority circumvented?

Tough Days ahead

[LTBC]

Poto, having no practical vacancies is incidental. From a legal standpoint the SH FO role itself is not redundant.

[Poto]

Poto, having no practical vacancies is incidental. From a legal standpoint the SH FO role itself is not redundant.
I would wager about 75+% of SH roles are currently redundant.
What Proof have you or QF or any airline that SH will need its entire workforce in the Short, medium or Long term? The Parked 737’s tell a different story right now unfortunately

while I’m at it. The Jumbo is the only role where your logic makes sense. They are gone, not parked

[LTBC]

Yes, the 747 is the only role that is redundant. The RIN process is what prevents redundancies in category.

If the company wants to make SH pilots redundant due to a SH surplus, it can.

[Emmit Stussy]

Thanks for your response Troo, but this doesn’t speak to my initial query regarding Fujiroll’s post #678.
Once again, I’m possibly not asking the right question.

In his post of #678 he said,


60 to 61 - 65
61 to 62 - 59
62 to 63 - 50

Gives you approximately - 170 who would be considering the package very closely. Now I don't have the data on LHvSH age split, but for arguments sake lets assume 20% are SH pilots who are ineligible - Left with around 140 give or take.

Rather than me asking the wrong question (again); could you or Give it the herbs or Fuji himself explain what this sentence (in bold) means.

[Poto]

Yes, the 747 is the only role that is redundant. The RIN process is what prevents redundancies in category.

If the company wants to make SH pilots redundant due to a SH surplus, it can.
Once Again I Point out the Last on First Off policy wrt redundancy in the IA. Their is no other Industrial instrument we have signed up to to circumvent that. The protection is not there for poops and giggles

[ScepticalOptomist]

If the company end up making anyone CR, it will be via the master seniority list as the IA has precedence.

Sure, those in SH wish it weren’t so, and those in LH do, but IR law doesn’t really bother with opinions - just the agreements as signed by the interested parties. Whether you’re LH or SH - we have one seniority list.

I don’t believe anyone will be made CR.

[Give it the herbs]

Thanks for your response Troo, but this doesn’t speak to my initial query regarding Fujiroll’s post #678.
Once again, I’m possibly not asking the right question.

In his post of #678 he said,

"60 to 61 - 65
61 to 62 - 59
62 to 63 - 50

Gives you approximately - 170 who would be considering the package very closely. Now I don't have the data on LHvSH age split, but for arguments sake lets assume 20% are SH pilots who are ineligible - Left with around 140 give or take."

Rather than me asking the wrong question (again); could you or Give it the herbs or Fuji himself explain what this sentence (in bold) means.

He is saying the number of pilots in those age brackets listed is inclusive of both SH and LH pilots. So, to find a way to roughly rule out how many of those 170 pilots are in SH (who as you know are not eligible for VR), he is assuming it's approx. 20% of them. Given the way our seniority lists are written, it would be an absolute nightmare to work out the exact numbers without knowing each of those pilots by name and what fleet they are on.

[Ruvap]

Yes, the 747 is the only role that is redundant. The RIN process is what prevents redundancies in category.

If the company wants to make SH pilots redundant due to a SH surplus, it can.


The A380 is effectively redundant. It ain’t coming back. It’s finished so those stood down pilots are basically unemployed until the company comes clean and decides on the future of the A380, but that decision won’t come soon. So A380 crew are screwed for now. The IA will first model all Q and all A pilots going back to their original hauls. Then it will determine where the surplus is. We already know it’s in LH. Then it should start chopping from the bottom of the Q list, below the Y of course. A’ Pilots will be the last ones sacked in the case of a LH surplus. Hopefully those over 60 will just leave. I know they are whinging to AIPA because they cannot arrange their final flights! Man, if that’s their biggest problem, they have lost the plot.

[Keg]

CR can’t create a vacancy otherwise the position was never actually redundant.

This alone means SH is quarantined from a LH surplus.

As others have pointed out, you could get rid of 100 SH pilots and it won’t create a vacancy in the current flying program.


I don’t believe anyone will be made CR.

Agreed.

[Emmit Stussy]

He is saying the number of pilots in those age brackets listed is inclusive of both SH and LH pilots.
The above doesn’t make sense; there are no short haul pilots in long haul.

Except for that cohort of pilots who fall into the “early retirement” category, every other pilot in long haul is eligible for VR. Says so in the HoBO’s email last Friday.

[SandyPalms]

Emmit, there is a graph showing the number of pilots in QF who turn 65, year by year. Its all of us, not SH or LH, but everyone employed in QF mainline. Doesn't matter if you're in SH or LH you can still turn 65. That is the chart he is referring to. So he is taking 20% out of the numbers to try and reflect an accurate number that may be in SH who will turn 65, as SH pilots are not eligible to take thus round of VR.

[Emmit Stussy]

This isn’t about that group who will turn 65 on or before 01/07/2022. I’m happy to disregard the quoted 20%, Fujiroll’s premise that there’s short haul pilots in long haul (and therefore ineligible for VR) is incorrect.
I say again, there are no short haul pilots in long haul.

[SandyPalms]

This isn’t about that group who will turn 65 on or before 01/07/2022. I’m happy to disregard the quoted 20%, Fujiroll’s premise that there’s short haul pilots in long haul (and therefore ineligible for VR) is incorrect.
I say again, there are no short haul pilots in long haul.

I thought you were responding to Troo?
Nobody is suggesting SH pilots are in LH. I think you've missed the point. Are you in QF and a member of AIPA? Have you seen the chart?

[Keg]

Fujiroll’s premise that there’s short haul pilots in long haul (and therefore ineligible for VR) is incorrect.
I say again, there are no short haul pilots in long haul.

No. His premise was that 20% of the numbers he was quoting may be in SH and are therefore ineligible for VR.

[Fujiroll76]

That was exactly the road I was going down.

Emmit - Please don’t get the two confused. I’m not saying there are SH pilots in LH at all. The age graph includes both and therefore to get somewhat accurate figures I used an assumption that there would be approx 20% SH in the above 60 category.

Again it’s not perfect as you can’t know exactly BUT 20 seems reasonable and gives us all a ballpark to work towards.

[Koizi]

Looking ahead, let's say there is a solid uptake of ER and VR. Also likely is that every LH SO hired since late 2016 "volunteers" for LWOP out of fear of CR, not wanting the "pass-over" plague to rise to their number.
Company is going to be pretty happy with the result.

[Wingspar]

Looking ahead, let's say there is a solid uptake of ER and VR. Also likely is that every LH SO hired since late 2016 "volunteers" for LWOP out of fear of CR, not wanting the "pass-over" plague to rise to their number.
Company is going to be pretty happy with the result.

Then QF will be short if they want to reactivate the 380’s.
Then the cascade affect with training people up.
Sound silly?
Last VR they were recruiting well within two years!

[Koizi]

I guess my question is, when every SO on the 330/787 applies for LWOP (and I suspect it would be a gamble not to ) will they approve them all even if they get a solid VR/ER subscription?

[ruprecht]

I guess my question is, when every SO on the 330/787 applies for LWOP (and I suspect it would be a gamble not to ) will they approve them all even if they get a solid VR/ER subscription?
How many LWOPs equal 1 CR?

Thats the question, I think. The company is trying to save money. If enough take LWOP then I feel CR will not be necessary.

[thec172man]

How many LWOPs equal 1 CR?

Thats the question, I think. The company is trying to save money. If enough take LWOP then I feel CR will not be necessary.

Why run CR? If they don't get enough numbers for VR and LWOP, just run another EOI for LWOP. The company approves LWOP, so they can just ask for another round of LWOP with a new deadline, if they really wanted to avoid CR and having the redundancy by haul or straight seniority case tested.

[SixDemonBag]

I guess my question is, when every SO on the 330/787 applies for LWOP (and I suspect it would be a gamble not to ) will they approve them all even if they get a solid VR/ER subscription?

I’m sure they would take up every LWOP application they are given. It’s only a 4 week activation to get them back, isn’t it? Plus they could heavy crew long sectors if they got caught with their pants down

[Variable Incidence]

Surely if enough pilots were to take LWOP there’d be no need for VR or CR as effectively the LWOP pilots aren’t a cash drain to the business anymore? Or am I missing something?

[Fonz121]

I’m sure they would take up every LWOP application they are given. It’s only a 4 week activation to get them back, isn’t it? Plus they could heavy crew long sectors if they got caught with their pants down

It’s only on special lwop that they can recall you with 4 weeks notice. I don’t know who will actually take that up considering you’re still on the chopping block whereas you’re not on normal lwop.

[Keg]

Last VR they were recruiting well within two years!

20 months! And they were slow off the mark and should have been recruiting earlier than that!

Koizi et al, sit on your hands. Your accrued leave is less than 12% of your total income. For a S/O with less than three years in that’s about $15K per annum? 200 S/Os taking LWOP saves $3 million. That’s a rounding error!

[ScepticalOptomist]

I guess my question is, when every SO on the 330/787 applies for LWOP (and I suspect it would be a gamble not to ) will they approve them all even if they get a solid VR/ER subscription?

I’d argue they’d be crazy to take LWOP unless they have another job. Scaring them into it is a cunning plan, but I don’t think they need to do that to avoid CR.

As I said before, I doubt anyone will be made CR.

[Wingspar]

People are talking about the bottom few hundred going on LWOP and most probably they will.
I agree that if the flying pick up they can heavy crew until they come back.
Has anyone thought, I bet QF hasn’t, about the significant loss of senior Captains on the A380?
Chances are about half will go in the next few months. A good deal of the 400 guys and gals as well.
Also a sizeable chunk of A330 and a handful of 787 Captains.
Meanwhile we still have the same number of airframes hibernating. Ok, minus the 400.
But what if the flying really picks up? A vaccine comes along? There are 100-200 in the pipeline.
Talk about being caught with your pants down!
How long to train up a A380 Captain and all the residual slots?
Sound silly? Just as silly as suggesting in January that the whole aviation industry would be shutdown by March?

[ECAMACTIONSCOMPLETE]

People are talking about the bottom few hundred going on LWOP and most probably they will.
I agree that if the flying pick up they can heavy crew until they come back.
Has anyone thought, I bet QF hasn’t, about the significant loss of senior Captains on the A380?
Chances are about half will go in the next few months. A good deal of the 400 guys and gals as well.
Also a sizeable chunk of A330 and a handful of 787 Captains.
Meanwhile we still have the same number of airframes hibernating. Ok, minus the 400.
But what if the flying really picks up? A vaccine comes along? There are 100-200 in the pipeline.
Talk about being caught with your pants down!
How long to train up a A380 Captain and all the residual slots?
Sound silly? Just as silly as suggesting in January that the whole aviation industry would be shutdown by March?

you reckon the A380 is coming back?

[Icarus2001]

you reckon the A380 is coming back? I certainly don't. Otherwise they would be parked in Alice Springs with the Singapore Airlines and Scoot aircraft. They are going to the US, in my opinion because in three years time it will be expensive to find A380 ferry crew and QF will no longer have the capability to ferry them overseas themselves.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x630/singapore_airlines_alice_springs_australia_5b629b7b2553e5320 651f506723b98a20fc29a20.jpg

[John Citizen]

I certainly don't. Otherwise they would be parked in Alice Springs with the Singapore


Apparently the humidity is much less in Arizona compared to Alice Springs.

Plus A380 engineers are readily available nearby in LA for ongoing maintenance

That is what Qantas said anyway.

[Bodie1]

They'll be back.

[Poto]

They Should be back. If not they are with all the other QF Jets that never came back

[Wingspar]

Will they be back? I don’t know.
Back in January I didn’t know that the whole aviation industry would be shut down in a few months either.
Does anyone know what aviation will be like next January?
What I do know is that by then Qantas won’t have enough A380 Captains if they do want to reactivate them.
Infact Qantas won’t have a sizeable chunk of their senior Captains?
And they can’t get them back either!
Silly??

[Jeps]

I’d say QF have made the smart play here. They don’t have to move them anywhere if they never come back. In my stupid opinion we won’t see them again. This pandemic has already taken away so much from an industry that we all love dearly.

[Keg]

I reckon Qantas want the A380s back. The longer this goes on the less likely that is though. I suspect Qantas will invest in them for the next couple of years in the hope they’ll be needed and kick the can on making a final decision down the road for a while.

There are about 50 A380 Captains over 60. Half the number of A380 Captains so about 6 aeroplanes worth. They could bring back 6 A380s and still not need additional crew. Probably enough notice to train up other crew if they intend on bringing additional A380s back.

There are 44 A330 Captains over 60. About 18% of the total A330 Captains. Similarly I reckon the ramp up would be slow enough that we’d be able to cover for the additional crew if eventually all the A330s are required.

[Wingspar]

All good points Keg!
Its all a guess isn’t it?
My point is that once those highly trained, qualified line Captains are gone they’re gone!
Can’t get them back if they wanted to. Take time to train up other crew. Take time to replace the replacements.
Who knows???

[OBNO]

When has Qantas ever got their Pilot numbers right?

[maggot]

When has Qantas ever got their Pilot numbers right?

there was one month back in 2006 that i recall

[Bug Smasher Smasher]

My point is that once those highly trained, qualified line Captains are gone they’re gone!
Can’t get them back if they wanted to. Take time to train up other crew. Take time to replace the replacements.
With 3 years to plan I don’t think time is really a factor.
It’s not as through the 380 crew that may finally get stood up will just shave off their beards and step onto a flightdeck anyway.

[galdian]

With 3 years to plan I don’t think time is really a factor.
It’s not as through the 380 crew that may finally get stood up will just shave off their beards and step onto a flightdeck anyway.

Find it cute anyone would use the word "plan" at this stage of happenings.
Hope, anticipate, extrapolate, propose, target, project and a whole bunch of other words maybe - but "plan"?

Parallel universe.

Cheers

[Angle of Attack]

I find it comical that anyone really believes the A380 will come back...in your dreams! Gone baby forever and there won’t be a send off because they have been a complete distaster financially for QF since they arrived...

[QJB]

I find it comical that anyone really believes the A380 will come back...in your dreams! Gone baby forever and there won’t be a send off because they have been a complete distaster financially for QF since they arrived...
If this is the case, what effect will that have on potential CR’s? Would that surplus of more senior pilots push the bottom guys and girls into CR a couple of years from now? Hope it never happens for everyone’s sake.

[Bodie1]

I find it comical that anyone really believes the A380 will come back

Wanna bet?

[Wingspar]

A quote from AJ;

“The A380 is a crucial part of our long-haul fleet and this upgrade program will see customers enjoy everything the aircraft has to offer for years to come.”

Admittedly before Covid but a big call to write off the fleet with six newly refurbished aircraft done. Effectively a new aircraft with the latest cabin, IFE etc.
The A380 is a unique asset. QF doesn’t have any replacement in terms of capacity or cabin i.e. First Class!
Everyone else is parking their old ones so QF would be wise to keep these spiffy newly refurbed ones available to monopolise routes i.e. USA.
Pity they are just about to send off most of the A380 crew away with a golden hand shake??
Are you going to update your LOP Keg?

[cynphil]

Possibly nominating a 3 year period for the A380 is really just another ‘smokescreen’ by the company. A RIN is still required for the B747(but much smaller one due to the offered VR plan). If they were also to add that the A380 would also be retired, the associated RIN or VR/ CR would become very expensive for the company! Post Covid, right aircraft for the right route will become paramount! We really don’t know what aviation will be like in 6 months , so announcing 3 years is very suspect.

[Koizi]

Originally Posted by Keg
Koizi et al, sit on your hands. Your accrued leave is less than 12% of your total income. For a S/O with less than three years in that’s about $15K per annum? 200 S/Os taking LWOP saves $3 million. That’s a rounding error!

I'd love to follow that advice, as I would be keen to take on any trickle of work and don't need the generous certainty that LWOP offers
However, with the sword of Damocles rising higher and higher up the seniority ladder with every other SO that takes LWOP, I feel most of us post 2016 graduates have only one certain choice.

[dr dre]

If this is the case, what effect will that have on potential CR’s? Would that surplus of more senior pilots push the bottom guys and girls into CR a couple of years from now? Hope it never happens for everyone’s sake.

A “couple of years from now” is unpredictable. Worldwide some airliners remained in storage for up to 9 years post GFC before being reactivated. It’s complex enough now to plan a RIN, but for the next 3 years when no one knows what will happen? Management have indicated that stand downs will continue whilst the fleet is stood down. As long as they are not retiring aircraft, like what was announced with the 747, then nothing changes from the forecast that has provided 190 pilots in surplus (that is the forecast til mid 2022).

Something that will have to be considered is the fact whilst pilots on long term stand down will probably return to flying, after having spent several years off coming back to flying won’t just be a matter of a few sims and off they go. The retraining will be extensive, and not just for individuals, we’re talking about entire fleets of pilots including instructors who haven’t been operational for a considerable length of time.

[Australopithecus]

You would guess that a return to “normal” traffic would be slow and incremental though, so a fleet-wide recency problem should be manageable given enough forethought.

I am not reading anything currently that suggests a robust travel recovery absent a vaccine, even if immunisation is something that may have to be boosted periodically. I fear that we haven’t seen the entire SarsCoV-2 bag of tricks quite yet.

[goodonyamate]

Any RIN is fairly irrelevant at this time, as it will only occur on paper.

[Going Boeing]

A quote from AJ;
“The A380 is a crucial part of our long-haul fleet and this upgrade program will see customers enjoy everything the aircraft has to offer for years to come.”
Admittedly before Covid but a big call to write off the fleet with six newly refurbished aircraft done. Effectively a new aircraft with the latest cabin, IFE etc.
The A380 is a unique asset. QF doesn’t have any replacement in terms of capacity or cabin i.e. First Class!
Everyone else is parking their old ones so QF would be wise to keep these spiffy newly refurbed ones available to monopolise routes i.e. USA.
Pity they are just about to send off most of the A380 crew away with a golden hand shake??

I suspect that QF will have to write the cost of the A380 upper deck upgrade as a badly timed investment. This virus has such a stranglehold throughout the world that it can’t be contained until a vaccine is released and thus, any international traffic for the next few years will be a fraction of the 2019 level and will be “point to point”. This means that aircraft such as the B787, A350, A330NEO & even the A321XLR will be the most suitable types. Working against the A380 coming back into service is the fact that it was designed as a “hub to hub” aircraft, it has a very high fuel consumption, extremely high maintenance costs and the loads/fares won’t be high enough to offset these issues.

There was an article recently detailing the amount of work that A380’s require whilst in storage (mainly focussed on the SQ A380’s in Alice Springs but detailed the manufacturer’s requirements) and it is very significant. If all 12 QF A380’s get parked in Victorville, then there would be sufficient full time work for at least two of the LAX based engineers (relocate or have a lengthy commute each day). It would be worth monitoring if this ongoing maintenance is being performed because, if it stops, it signals that management have made the decision not to bring them back into service. Another scenario is that they may only maintain the aircraft that have had the recent upgrade.

In Oz, aircraft are written off over 12 years so, the early delivered aircraft would now have no value on the company books and, as we’ve known for a long time, there is zero market for second hand A380’s. For the remaining aircraft in the fleet there would be some residual book value which could be used by Joyce to increase the company’s FY loss (may be delayed a year or two to get the best timing) and then orchestrate a second miraculous turnaround - imagine the bonus he could reward himself for doing that.

cynphil - I totally agree.

Bodie 1 - do you still want to make a bet?

[Bodie1]

Bodie 1 - do you still want to make a bet?

Yes,

Willing to put money in escrow.

I'm making this bet based on the fact that the aviation industry is entirely irrational. (I can back that up by research).

[Ruvap]

Yes,

Willing to put money in escrow.

I'm making this bet based on the fact that the aviation industry is entirely irrational. (I can back that up by research).

Irrational is a great word. That is exactly the view senior management and many other segments of the airline have on our working conditions. Never say never but the A380 is finished or at least the sky gods that fly them will never fly them again under our current award conditions. The restructuring will cost 1 billion and investors are already on board and happy to spend that money on getting rid of unnecessary staff and aircraft. There will be no turning back. The airline will be much smaller on the other side. The sky gods should just be grateful for extracting years out of what has been an unbelievable gravy train.

[ruprecht]

Has anyone actually met one of these sky gods?

[Busbitch]

Why would QF pay millions of dollars to dust off the A380 in three years? Its' a white elephant now, let alone in a world where other airlines will be backing out of they A350 purchase contracts left & right. It's dead, it just doesn't know it yet. The 350-900 & 1000 is a superior choice in every way.

[Icarus2001]

Apparently the humidity is much less in Arizona compared to Alice Springs.

Do you have any source for "apparently"?

Two minutes on the internet shows the opposite to be the case. Alice Springs is much less humid than Mojave.

https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Humidity-perc,mojave-california-us,United-States-of-America

https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Humidity-perc,Alice-Springs,Australia

[Telfer86]

I guess you can thank AJs predecessor for not buying the trippler

You are now left with valueless junk & pissed another $500 million up against the wall on upgrade

Strange how QF still persist with the line "couldn't make a 777 work"

Tough times no doubt - QF do not have an international business , but it "might" commence 12 months from now

Joiners from 2016 onward ihmo should stop listening to living legends on pprune who have decades on seniority & take LWOP

CRs are coming to the QF pilot group and the number will be in four figures - really just similar % to Kiwis/ BA / AirCan